Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 66 Filed 02/08/16 Page 1 of 9
`
`
`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
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`LAM RESEARCH CORP,
`
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`
`
`ANSWER TO SECOND AMENDED
`COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`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 Daniel L. Flamm hereby responds to the Second Amended Complaint
`
`filed by Lam Research Corp. (“Lam”) as follows:
`
`ANSWER TO SECOND
`AMENDED 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
`
`LAM Ex 1027-p. 1
`LAM v FLAMM
`IPR2015-01767
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`LAM RESEARCH CORP,
`
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`
`
`ANSWER TO SECOND AMENDED
`COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`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 Daniel L. Flamm hereby responds to the Second Amended Complaint
`
`filed by Lam Research Corp. (“Lam”) as follows:
`
`ANSWER TO SECOND
`AMENDED 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
`
`LAM Ex 1027-p. 1
`LAM v FLAMM
`IPR2015-01767
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 66 Filed 02/08/16 Page 2 of 9
`
`
`
`1.
`
`Admitted.
`
`NATURE OF ACTION
`
`PARTIES
`
`Lam Research Corporation
`
`2.
`3.
`4.
`5.
`6.
`7.
`
`8.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Daniel L. Flamm
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that he is the inventor or co-inventor and that he is the
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`assignee of the ‘849, ‘221, and ‘264 patents.
`9.
`10.
`11.
`12.
`13.
`14.
`15.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT
`
`
`2
`
`16.
`17.
`18.
`19.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`ANSWER TO SECOND
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`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
`
`LAM Ex 1027-p. 2
`LAM v FLAMM
`IPR2015-01767
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 66 Filed 02/08/16 Page 3 of 9
`
`20.
`
`Admitted.
`
`THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`21.
`22.
`23.
`24.
`25.
`26.
`27.
`
`28.
`29.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`Flamm’s Accusations Against Lam’s Products
`
`Admitted.
`
`Dr. Flamm lacks knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as
`
`to the identity of all of Lam’s customers, but admits the remaining allegations in this
`
`paragraph.
`30.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that counsel representing him accused certain
`
`semiconductor manufacturers of infringing the ‘849, ‘221, and ‘264 patents, but denies
`
`that it ever accused Lam or Lam’s products of infringing those patents. Dr. Flamm
`
`denies the remaining allegations contained in this paragraph.
`31.
`
`Dr. Flamm lacks knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as
`
`to the veracity of the allegations in this paragraph.
`32.
`
`Dr. Flamm lacks knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as
`
`to the identity of Lam’s customers, but admits that counsel representing him sent letters
`
`to certain semiconductor manufacturers in July 2015 that, in part, regarded this lawsuit
`
`and further admits that the quoted language appears in those letters. Dr. Flamm denies
`
`ANSWER TO SECOND
`AMENDED 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
`
`LAM Ex 1027-p. 3
`LAM v FLAMM
`IPR2015-01767
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 66 Filed 02/08/16 Page 4 of 9
`
`
`that those letters accused Lam or Lam’s products of infringing those patents and denies
`
`the remaining allegations contained in this paragraph.
`
`The ‘849 Patent
`
`33.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that the quoted language appears in claim charts
`
`prepared by Dr. Flamm’s counsel. Dr. Flamm denies the remaining allegations contained
`
`in this paragraph.
`34.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that the quoted language appears in claim charts
`
`prepared by Dr. Flamm’s counsel. Dr. Flamm denies the remaining allegations contained
`
`in this paragraph.
`35.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that his counsel prepared the claim chart that appears in
`
`this paragraph without the highlighting. Dr. Flamm denies the remaining allegations
`
`contained in this paragraph.
`36.
`37.
`
`Denied.
`
`Dr. Flamm lacks knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as
`
`to whether and what Lam encouraged its customers to do and denies the remaining
`
`allegations contained in this paragraph.
`
`The ‘221 Patent
`
`38.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that the quoted language appears in claim charts
`
`prepared by Dr. Flamm’s counsel. Dr. Flamm denies the remaining allegations contained
`
`in this paragraph.
`39.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that his counsel prepared the claim chart that appears in
`
`this paragraph without the highlighting. Dr. Flamm denies the remaining allegations
`
`contained in this paragraph.
`40.
`
`Denied.
`
`ANSWER TO SECOND
`AMENDED 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
`
`LAM Ex 1027-p. 4
`LAM v FLAMM
`IPR2015-01767
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 66 Filed 02/08/16 Page 5 of 9
`
`
`
`41.
`
`Dr. Flamm lacks knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as
`
`to whether and what Lam encouraged its customers to do and denies the remaining
`
`allegations contained in this paragraph.
`
`The ‘264 Patent
`
`42.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that the quoted language appears in claim charts
`
`prepared by Dr. Flamm’s counsel. Dr. Flamm denies the remaining allegations contained
`
`in this paragraph.
`43.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that his counsel prepared the claim chart that appears in
`
`this paragraph without the highlighting. Dr. Flamm denies the remaining allegations
`
`contained in this paragraph.
`44.
`45.
`
`Denied.
`
`Dr. Flamm lacks knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as
`
`to whether and what Lam encouraged its customers to do. Dr. Flamm admits that the
`
`quoted language appears in letters prepared by his counsel, but denies the remaining
`
`allegations contained in this paragraph.
`
`Lam’s Indemnity Obligations to Its Customers
`
`46.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that his counsel has accused certain semiconductor
`
`manufacturers of infringing the ‘849, ‘221, and ‘264 patents, in part by operating
`
`equipment supplied by Lam in an infringing manner. Dr. Flamm denies the remaining
`
`allegations contained in this paragraph.
`47.
`
`Dr. Flamm lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the veracity
`
`of the allegations contained in this paragraph.
`48.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that he owns the ‘849, ‘221, and ‘264 patents but denies
`
`the remaining allegations contained in this paragraph.
`49.
`
`Dr. Flamm lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the veracity
`
`of the allegations contained in this paragraph.
`
`ANSWER TO SECOND
`AMENDED 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
`
`LAM Ex 1027-p. 5
`LAM v FLAMM
`IPR2015-01767
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 66 Filed 02/08/16 Page 6 of 9
`
`
`
`50.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that since Lam’s original Complaint in this action was
`
`filed, counsel for Dr. Flamm has commenced a lawsuit against a semiconductor
`
`manufacturer alleging infringement of the ‘849, ‘221, and ‘264 patents, which it
`
`understands is one of Lam’s customers.
`
`Other Semiconductor Tool Companies
`
`51.
`52.
`53.
`54.
`
`Denied.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`COUNT I
`
` (Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement of the ‘849 Patent)
`
`55.
`
`Dr. Flamm hereby incorporates by reference his responses to Paragraphs 1
`
`to 54.
`
`56.
`57.
`58.
`
`Denied.
`
`Denied.
`
`Denied.
`
`COUNT II
`
`(Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement of the ‘221 Patent)
`
`59.
`
`Dr. Flamm hereby incorporates by reference his responses to Paragraphs 1
`
`to 58.
`
`60.
`61.
`62.
`
`Denied.
`
`Denied.
`
`Denied.
`
`COUNT III
`
`(Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement of the ‘264 Patent)
`
`ANSWER TO SECOND
`AMENDED 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
`
`LAM Ex 1027-p. 6
`LAM v FLAMM
`IPR2015-01767
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 66 Filed 02/08/16 Page 7 of 9
`
`
`
`to 62.
`
`63.
`
`Dr. Flamm hereby incorporates by reference his responses to Paragraphs 1
`
`64.
`65.
`66.
`
`Denied.
`
`Denied.
`
`Denied.
`
`COUNT IV
`
`(Declaratory Judgment of Unenforceability of the ‘849 Patent)
`
`67.
`
`Dr. Flamm hereby incorporates by reference his responses to Paragraphs 1
`
`to 66.
`
`68.
`69.
`
`Denied.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that Lam’s machines themselves do not and cannot
`
`infringe the patented method claims of the ‘849 patent. Dr. Flamm denies the remaining
`
`allegations contained in this paragraph.
`70.
`
`Denied.
`
`COUNT V
`
`(Declaratory Judgment of Unenforceability of the ‘221 Patent)
`
`71.
`
`Dr. Flamm hereby incorporates by reference his responses to Paragraphs 1
`
`to 70.
`
`72.
`73.
`
`Denied.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that Lam’s machines themselves do not and cannot
`
`infringe the patented method claims of the ‘221 patent. Dr. Flamm denies the remaining
`
`allegations contained in this paragraph.
`74.
`
`Denied.
`
`COUNT VI
`
`(Declaratory Judgment of Unenforceability of the ‘264 Patent)
`
`ANSWER TO SECOND
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`
`7
`
`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
`
`LAM Ex 1027-p. 7
`LAM v FLAMM
`IPR2015-01767
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 66 Filed 02/08/16 Page 8 of 9
`
`
`
`to 74.
`
`75.
`
`Dr. Flamm hereby incorporates by reference his responses to Paragraphs 1
`
`76.
`77.
`
`Denied.
`
`Dr. Flamm admits that Lam’s machines themselves do not and cannot
`
`infringe the patented method claims of the ‘264 patent. Dr. Flamm denies the remaining
`
`allegations contained in this paragraph.
`78.
`
`Denied.
`
`WHEREFORE, Dr. Flamm respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in
`
`his favor and against Lam on Counts I, II, III, IV, V, and VI of the Second Amended
`
`Complaint, dismiss such claims with prejudice, and award Dr. Flamm such further relief
`
`as the Court deems appropriate.
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: February 8, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`Attorney for Defendant and
`Third-Party Plaintiff
`DANIEL L. FLAMM
`
`ANSWER TO SECOND
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`
`8
`
`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
`
`LAM Ex 1027-p. 8
`LAM v FLAMM
`IPR2015-01767
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF Document 66 Filed 02/08/16 Page 9 of 9
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that on
`
`February 8, 2016, a true and correct copy of the foregoing ANSWER TO SECOND
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT was served in accordance with Rule 5, Federal Rules of Civil
`
`Procedure on the following counsel of record in the manner indicated:
`
`Via CM/ECF
`
`Morgan Chu
`mchu@irell.com
`Talin Gordnia
`tgordnia@irell.com
`Samuel Kai Lu
`slu@irell.com
`Irell & Manella LLP
`1800 Avenue of the Stars Suite 900
`Los Angeles, CA 90067-4271
`Telephone: 310-277-1010
`Fax: 310-203-7199
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ George C. Summerfield
`George C. Summerfield
`STADHEIM & GREAR LTD.
`
`Attorney for Defendant and
`Third-Party Plaintiff
`DANIEL L. FLAMM
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ANSWER TO SECOND
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 4:15-cv-01277-BLF
`
`
`9
`
`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
`
`LAM Ex 1027-p. 9
`LAM v FLAMM
`IPR2015-01767
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
