`
`
`STADHEIM & GREAR, LTD.
`George C. Summerfield
`(summerfield@stadheimgrear.com)
`400 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 2200
`Chicago, Illinois 60611
`Telephone: (312) 755-4400
`Facsimile: (312) 755-4408
`
`Attorneys for Defendant
`and Third-Party Plaintiff
`DANIEL L. FLAMM
`
`
`
`REDACTED VERSION OF
`DOCUMENT SOUGHT TO BE
`FILED UNDER SEAL
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`LAM RESEARCH CORP,
`
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`
`
`AMENDED THIRD-PARTY
`COMPLAINT
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
` v.
`
`DANIEL L. FLAMM,
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`DANIEL L. FLAMM,
`
`Third-Party Plaintiff,
`
`
`
` v.
`
`GLOBALFOUNDRIES U.S. INC.; INTEL
`CORPORATION; MAXIM INTEGRATED
`PRODUCTS, INC.; and MICRON
`TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
`
`
`
`Third-Party Defendants.
`
`Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff Daniel L. Flamm hereby alleges, by way of
`amended third-party complaint against GlobalFoundries U.S., Inc., Intel Corporation,
`Maxim Integrated Products, Inc., and Micron Technology, Inc. (collectively, “third-party
`defendants”) as follows:
`
`AMENDED THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`
`1
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 117 Filed 03/29/16 Page 2 of 6
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`1.
`Dr. Flamm is the owner and inventor (or co-inventor) of United States
`Patent Nos. 5,711,849 entitled “Process Optimization in Gas Phase Dry Etching”;
`6,017,221 entitled “Process Depending on Plasma Discharges Sustained by Inductive
`Coupling”; and RE40,264 entitled “Multi-Temperature Processing” (collectively, “the
`Flamm Patents”). The Flamm Patents involve methods used in the fabrication of
`semiconductors.
`
`PARTIES
`2.
`Dr. Flamm is an individual who resides in Walnut Creek, California.
`3.
`GlobalFoundries U.S., Inc. is a corporation organized under the laws of
`the State of Delaware with its principal place of business at 2600 Great America Way,
`Santa Clara Gateway, Santa Clara, CA 95054.
`4.
`Intel Corporation is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of
`Delaware with its principal place of business at 2200 Mission College Boulevard, Santa
`Clara, CA 95054.
`5.
`Maxim Integrated Products, Inc. is a corporation organized under the laws
`of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business at 160 Rio Robles, San Jose,
`CA 95134.
`6.
`Micron Technology, Inc. is a corporation organized under the laws of the
`State of Delaware with its principal place of business at 8000 S. Federal Way, Boise, ID
`83716. Micron Technology maintains a place of business at Tasman Technology Park,
`540 Alder Drive, Milpitas, CA 95035.
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`7.
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this dispute under 35
`U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`8.
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over the third-party defendants
`because each of themhave sufficient minimum contacts with this forum as a result of
`business conducted within the State of California. Personal jurisdiction exists
`
`AMENDED THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 117 Filed 03/29/16 Page 3 of 6
`
`specifically over each of the third-party defendants because each of them, directly or
`through subsidiaries or intermediaries, has done business in the State of California, has
`committed acts of infringement, and continues to commit acts of infringement in the State
`of California, and/or
` within this judicial district, which
`gives rise to Dr. Flamm’s third-party complaint.
`9.
`Venue is proper in this judicial district under 35 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b),
`1391(c), and 1400(b).
`
`FACTS
`Lam filed its Amended Complaint in this action on or about August 28,
`
`10.
`
`2015.
`
`In its Amended Complaint, Lam seeks a declaration of non-infringement
`11.
`of each of the Flamm Patents.
`12.
`Lam further seeks a declaration that: “Lam and its customers do not design
`or use its products in an infringing manner” for each of the Flamm Patents.
`13.
`
`
`
`COUNT I
`Infringement of the ‘849 Patent (Against All Defendants)
`Dr. Flamm hereby incorporates the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1
`14.
`through 13, as if fully set forth herein.
`15.
`
`On January 27, 1998, United States Patent No. 5,711,849 (“the ‘849
`
`Patent”) was issued for inventions titled “Process Optimization in Gas Phase Dry
`Etching.” A true and correct copy of the ‘849 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A to
`Lam’s Amended Complaint. Dr. Flamm is the co-inventor and sole owner of the ‘849
`Patent.
`
`AMENDED THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`3
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 117 Filed 03/29/16 Page 4 of 6
`
`16.
`
`Upon information and belief, the third-party defendants directly infringe
`
`the claims of the ‘849
` equipment that the third-party defendants
` and/or by using
`may have purchased from Applied Materials, Inc. and/or Tokyo Electron Ltd. to
`manufacture integrated circuits in a manner that infringes the patents in-suit.
`17.
`The infringement of the ‘849 Patent by third-party defendants has
`damaged Dr. Flamm, and Dr. Flamm is entitled to recover from third-party defendants
`the damages he has suffered as a result of their wrongful acts of infringement in an
`amount subject to proof at trial.
`
`COUNT II
`Infringement of the ‘221 Patent (Against All Defendants)
`Dr. Flamm hereby incorporates the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1
`18.
`through 17, as if fully set forth herein.
`19.
`On January 25, 2000, United States Patent No. 6,017,221 (“the ‘221
`Patent”) was issued for inventions titled “Process Depending on Plasma Discharges
`Sustained by Inductive Coupling.” A true and correct copy of the ‘221 Patent is attached
`hereto as Exhibit B to Lam’s Amended Complaint. Dr. Flamm is the inventor and sole
`owner of the ‘221 Patent.
`20.
`Upon information and belief, third-party defendants directly infringe the
`claims of the ‘221 patent by
` equipment that the third-party defendants may
` and/or by using
`have purchased from Applied Materials, Inc. and/or Tokyo Electron Ltd. to manufacture
`integrated circuits in a manner that infringes the patents in-suit.
`21.
`The infringement of the ‘221 Patent by third-party defendants has
`damaged Dr. Flamm, and Dr. Flamm is entitled to recover from third-party defendants
`the damages he has suffered as a result of their wrongful acts of infringement in an
`amount subject to proof at trial.
`
`AMENDED THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`4
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 117 Filed 03/29/16 Page 5 of 6
`
`COUNT III
`Infringement of the ‘264 Patent (Against All Defendants)
`Dr. Flamm hereby incorporates the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1
`22.
`through 21, as if fully set forth herein.
`23.
`On April 29, 2008, United States Patent No. RE 40,264 (“the ‘264
`Patent”) was issued for inventions titled “Multi-Temperature Processing.” A true and
`correct copy of the ‘264 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit C to Lam’s Amended
`
`Complaint. Dr. Flamm is the inventor and sole owner of the ‘264 Patent.
`24.
`Upon information and belief, third-party defendants directly infringe the
`
`b)
`
`claims of the ‘264 patent
` equipment that the third-party defendants may
` and/or by using
`have purchased from Applied Materials, Inc. and/or Tokyo Electron Ltd. to manufacture
`integrated circuits in a manner that infringes the patents in-suit.
`25.
`The infringement of the ‘264 Patent by third-party defendants has
`damaged Dr. Flamm, and Dr. Flamm is entitled to recover from third-party defendants
`the damages he has suffered as a result of their wrongful acts of infringement in an
`amount subject to proof at trial.
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`WHEREFORE, Dr. Flamm prays for entry of judgment:
`a)
`that third-party defendants have infringed one or more claims of the ‘849
`Patent;
`that third-party defendants have infringed one or more claims of the ‘221
`Patent;
`that third-party defendants have infringed one or more claims of the ‘264
`Patent;
`awarding Dr. Flamm sufficient damages to compensate Dr. Flamm for
`such infringement;
`
`c)
`
`d)
`
`AMENDED THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`5
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMAND
`Daniel L. Flamm hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable.
`
`
`January 15, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 117 Filed 03/29/16 Page 6 of 6
`
`
`
`e)
`f)
`g)
`
`
`awarding Dr. Flamm his attorneys’ fees incurred in this action;
`awarding costs to Dr. Flamm; and
`such further relief as the Court deems appropriate.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`STADHEIM & GREAR, LTD.
`By: /s/ George C. Summerfield
`George C. Summerfield
`(summerfield@stadheimgrear.com)
`STADHEIM & GREAR, LTD.
`400 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 2200
`Chicago, Illinois 60611
`Telephone: (312) 755-4400
`Facsimile: (312) 755-4408
`
`Attorneys for Defendant Daniel L. Flamm
`
`AMENDED THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`
`6
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`