IPR2022-00996 (US11,016,918)
`IPR2022-00999 (US11,232,054)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 1
`
`
`IPR2022-00999 (US11,232,054)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 1
`
`
`
`TOPICS
`
`GROUNDS 1-3
`Harris Does Not Receive Power Via Edge Connections
`Harris Does Not Receive The Recited Signals From the Host
`A POSITA Would Not Have Used the Required # of (Buck) Converters
`Ground 2 ASSUMES Separate Converters To Supply Each FBDIMM-Required Voltage
`A POSITA Would Not Have Replaced Harris’ Redundant Power
`Additional Reasons Why Dependent Claims Are Not Obvious
`
`GROUNDS 4-5
`The Recited “Memory Module” Means A Main Memory Module
`Spiers’ PCI Card Is Not a Memory Module
`POSITA Would Not Use DDR2/DDR3 or Recited # of (Buck) Converters
`Additional Reasons Why Dependent Claims Are Not Obvious
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 2
`
`
`
`The Challenged Claims Recite PCB Interface to the Host System Memory Slot
`
`
`
`The ’918/’054 PatentsThe ’918/’054 Patents
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 3
`
`
`
`The PCB Interface (to Host Memory Slot) Has Edge Connections
`Coupling Power/Data/Address/Control From Host to the Memory Module
`
`
`
`The ’918/’054 PatentsThe ’918/’054 Patents
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 4
`
`
`
`Harris’s Memory Module
`
`EX1023 (Harris), FIG. 1A.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 4.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 6.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 5
`
`
`
`Harris Does Not Provide Power to the Memory Module
`Via Memory Slot Edge Connections
`
`Harris’ external voltage is provided to the
`side of the module, not the edge connections
`
`EX1023 (Harris), FIG. 1A (modified/annotated).
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 5.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 7.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 6
`
`
`
`Petitioner Admits Location of Control/Data/Address Edge Connections on Harris
`
`Petitioner’s Reply (918) at 3-4.
`Petitioner’s Reply (054) at 3-4.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 7
`
`
`
`Harris Expressly Replaces The Power Supply Pins
`On The Edge Connection Interface
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0012].
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 4, 6, 8.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 6, 8, 11.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 8
`
`
`
`Harris Expressly Replaces The Power Supply Interface Pins
`On The Edge Connections
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0012].
`
`Not “interface” pins
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 4, 6, 8.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 6, 8, 11.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 9
`
`
`
`Harris Expressly Eliminates System Board Power Supply
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0019].
`
`If 12V were supplied from the motherboard, it
`would also be “system-board-specific power supply”
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 4, 8, 10-11.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 6, 8, 10-11.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 10
`
`
`
`12V is “Unregulated”; Unregulated Voltage Never Routed Through Interface
`
`Dr. Mangione-Smith:
`• Unregulated voltage never provided
`through interface pins or system
`board
`• Harris does not describe alternative
`locations for unregulated or
`regulated voltage pins
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶ 64.
`EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶ 64.
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0010]
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 6.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 8-9.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 11
`
`
`
`12V is “Unregulated”; Unregulated Voltage Never Routed Through Interface
`
`Dr. Mangione-Smith:
`• Unregulated voltage never provided
`through interface pins or system
`board
`• Harris does not describe alternative
`locations for unregulated or
`regulated voltage pins
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶ 64.
`EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶ 64.
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0016].
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 6.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 6.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 12
`
`
`
`Harris Does Not Provide Power to the Memory Module
`Via Memory Slot Edge Connections
`
`Memory
`Slot Edge
`Connection
`
`EX1023 (Harris), Fig. 3 (annotated).
`
`Wolfe: “Figure 3 is a block diagram and it does not show the power supplies”.Wolfe: “Figure 3 is a block diagram and it does not show the power supplies”.
`
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 4; Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 4.
`EX2030, 130:19-23 (cited at POR, 8); EX2061, 130:19-23 (cited at POR, 11).
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 13
`
`
`
`If Interface Pins Supplied Power in Harris, Figure 3 Would Depict
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0017].
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 8; Patent Owner Response (054) at 11.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 3, 19; Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 3, 20.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 14
`
`
`
`Harris Touts the Benefits of Eliminating System-Board Power Supply
`(i.e., an Internal Voltage Source)
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0019]
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 8.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 8.
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0020].
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 15
`
`
`
`Avoiding Interface Pins for Voltage Allows System Board to Host
`Evolving Technology
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0002].
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 3, 8, 35; Patent Owner Response (054) at 5, 10, 37.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 5; Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 5.
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 16
`
`
`
`Providing Power to Memory Modules Via Non-Edge Connections Was Known
`
`Backup
`Power
`Source
`
`Edge connections
`
`EX2036, 42.
`
`EX2035, 3
`
`Edge connections
`
`Backup Power Source
`
`EX2035, 3; EX2036, 42.
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 5.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 7.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 17
`
`
`
`The Claims Are Not Satisfied By Merely Supplying Power from the Host
`
`Petition (918) at 21-22.
`Petition (054) at 21-22.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 18
`
`
`
`TOPICS
`
`GROUNDS 1-3
`Harris Does Not Receive Power Via Edge Connections
`Harris Does Not Receive The Recited Signals From the Host
`A POSITA Would Not Have Used the Required # of (Buck) Converters
`Ground 2 ASSUMES Separate Converters To Supply Each FBDIMM-Required Voltage
`A POSITA Would Not Have Replaced Harris’ Redundant Power
`Additional Reasons Why Dependent Claims Are Not Obvious
`
`GROUNDS 4-5
`The Recited “Memory Module” Means A Main Memory Module
`Spiers’ PCI Card Is Not a Memory Module
`POSITA Would Not Use DDR2/DDR3 or Recited # of (Buck) Converters
`Additional Reasons Why Dependent Claims Are Not Obvious
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 19
`
`
`
`Claimed PCB Interface Receives Data, Address, and Control Signals From the Host
`
`
`
`The ’918/’054 PatentsThe ’918/’054 Patents
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 20
`
`
`
`FBDIMM – Advanced Memory Buffer (AMB)
`
`EX1027 at 4 (annotated).
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 11-12.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 14, 16.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 21
`
`
`
`The Petition Relies on Signals Generated On-Module By The AMB,
`Not Signals Received From The Host
`
`The Petition
`
`Petition (918) at 21.
`Petition (054) at 21.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 22
`
`
`
`The Petition Relies on Signals Generated On-Module By The AMB,
`Not Signals Received From The Host
`
`The Petition
`
`Alleged “control signals”
`
`Alleged “address signals”
`Alleged “control signals”
`
`Petition (918) at 22-23.
`Petition (054) at 22-23.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 23
`
`
`
`AMB Specification Distinguishes Data from Signals
`
`“Data” from
`controller to
`interface
`
`“Signal” from
`AMB to DRAM
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 12.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 16.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 24
`
`
`
`Harris+FBDIMM Module Receives Serialized Encoded Information
`
`No pins on
`FBDIMM
`module to
`receive address
`or control
`signals from
`host
`
`EX1027, 4.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 13.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 15.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 25
`
`
`
`Harris+FBDIMM Module Generates The Relied-on Address
`and Control Signals On-Module
`
`Address and
`Control Signals
`Relied On By
`Petitioner Are
`Generated by
`AMB
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 13.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 15.
`
`EX1027, 4.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 26
`
`
`
`Harris+FBDIMM Module Receives Serialized Encoded Information
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 12.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 14.
`
`EX2040 at 1.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 27
`
`
`
`Dr. Wolfe Testified That The AMB Receives Address/Control Information
`
`Andrew Wolfe
`Samsung’s Expert
`
`EX2030 (918) (Wolfe Deposition), 10:7-11.
`EX2060 (054) (Wolfe Deposition), 10:7-11.
`
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 8.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 8.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 28
`
`
`
`Harris+FBDIMM Module Received Data, Address, and Control Information
`
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 8.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 8.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 29
`
`
`
`FBDIMM Form Factor
`
`Petition (918) at 11; Petition (054) at 10-11.
`EX1028 (918, 054) at 25-26, 105.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 30
`
`
`
`TOPICS
`
`GROUNDS 1-3
`Harris Does Not Receive Power Via Edge Connections
`Harris Does Not Receive The Recited Signals From the Host
`A POSITA Would Not Have Used the Required # of (Buck) Converters
`Ground 2 ASSUMES Separate Converters To Supply Each FBDIMM-Required Voltage
`A POSITA Would Not Have Replaced Harris’ Redundant Power
`Additional Reasons Why Dependent Claims Are Not Obvious
`
`GROUNDS 4-5
`The Recited “Memory Module” Means A Main Memory Module
`Spiers’ PCI Card Is Not a Memory Module
`POSITA Would Not Use DDR2/DDR3 or Recited # of (Buck) Converters
`Additional Reasons Why Dependent Claims Are Not Obvious
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 31
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Proposed Voltage Mappings for ’918 Patent
`Based on Harris+FBDIMM
`Recited Voltages of Claim 1
`
`Petition (918) at 26-27.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 32
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Proposed Voltage Mappings for ’054 Patent
`Based on Harris+FBDIMM
`Recited Voltages of Claim 1
`
`Petition (054) at 27.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 33
`
`
`
`Harris Proposed Only VDD and VCC Generated On-Module In Face of DDR
`Specifications, Including FBDIMMs
`
`Vdd to ”memory
`devices”
`
`Targets DDR-
`Standardized
`Devices
`
`Vcc to
`buffer/DIMMM
`
`Petition (918) at 10, 16; Petition (054) at 9-10, 16.
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 17; Patent Owner Response (054) at 20.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0009].
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 34
`
`
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0014].
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0010].
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 32.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 35.
`
`EX1023 (Harris), FIG. 1B.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 35
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Expert Confirms That a POSA Reading Harris Would Understand And
`Comply With JEDEC Standards
`
`EX1003 (918) (Wolfe), ¶161.
`EX1003 (054) (Wolfe), ¶162.
`
`EX1003 (918) (Wolfe), ¶158.
`EX1003 (054) (Wolfe), ¶159.
`
`Petition (918) at 16.
`Petition (054) at 16.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 36
`
`
`
`In FBDIMM Specification, One Source For VCC/VCCFD;
`One Source For VDD, VDDQ, VDDL
`
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶88.
`EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶88.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 22-23.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 25-26.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 37
`
`
`
`Vtt Is Never Supplied to DRAM
`
`Harris Proposes On Module Vdd
`to DRAM
`
`DRAM Does not receive Vtt
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0009].
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 28.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 31-32.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 38
`
`EX1026 (DDR2 SDRAM), at 1.
`
`
`
`Harris Does Not Proposed Separate Module Regulators For
`5 VTT/VDDSPD Pins
`
`single set of VCC pins for
`VCC/VCCFBD
`
`single set of VDD pins for
`VDD/VDDQ/VDDL
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 22.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 25.
`
`EX1028 (JEDEC FBDIMM Specification), 11.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 39
`
`
`
`The FBDIMM Standard Uses A Single Converter For VDD/VDDQ/VDDL
`
`FBDIMM Standard provides for a single
`converter for VDD/VDDQ/VDDL
`
`EX1026 (JEDEC DDR2 SDRAM Specification), 9.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 25.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 28.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 40
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reliance on an Alleged “Option 2” Fails To Motivate
`Using Separate Buck Converters For VDD/VDDQ/VDDL
`
`Option 1
`
`Option 2
`
`EX1026 (JEDEC DDR2 SDRAM Specification), 9.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 25.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 28.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 41
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Alleged “Option 2” Are Actually Alternatives to Vref Tracking
`
`“Options” end in
`periods, not “ANDs”
`
`EX1026 (JEDEC DDR2 SDRAM Specification), 9.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 25.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 28.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 42
`
`
`
`Turning Voltages On Or Off Separately Does Not Motivate Separate Converters
`
`EX1026 (JEDEC DDR2 SDRAM Specification), 9.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 25.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 28.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 43
`
`
`
`“Isolation” Refers to DRAM Device Bumps
`
`EX1026, 3.
`
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶89.
`EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶89.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 24.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 26-27.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 44
`
`
`
`The Experts Agree: The Industry Rejected Using Multiple
`Converters in FBDIMMs for VDD/VDDQ/VDDL
`
`Andrew Wolfe
`Samsung’s Expert
`
`EX2030 (918) (Wolfe Deposition), 133:5-9.
`EX2060 (054) (Wolfe Deposition), 133:5-9.
`
`William Mangione-Smith
`Netlist’s Expert
`
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶90.
`EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶90.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 25; Patent Owner Response (054) at 25.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 17; Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 18.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 45
`
`
`
`The Industry Rejected Using Multiple Converters To Supply
`VDD/VDDQ/VDDL or VCC/VCCFBD For Good Reasons
`
`EX2006 (Micron Technical Note), 4.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 23-24; Patent Owner Response (054) at 25-26.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 17; Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 18.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 46
`
`
`
`The Industry Rejected Using Multiple Converters To Supply
`VDD/VDDQ/VDDL or VCC/VCCFBD For Good Reasons
`
`William
`Mangione-Smith
`Netlist’s Expert
`
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶88; EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶88.
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 23-24; Patent Owner Response (054) at 27.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 17; Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 18-19.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 47
`
`
`
`The Industry Rejected Using Multiple Converters To Supply
`VDD/VDDQ/VDDL or VCC/VCCFBD For Good Reasons
`
`William
`Mangione-Smith
`Netlist’s Expert
`
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶90.
`EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶90.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 25; Patent Owner Response (054) at 28.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 17; Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 18.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 48
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Evidence of Alleged Motivations to Use
`Separate Converters Are Untethered to Harris
`
`No evidence
`of analog
`voltages
`
`FBDIMM
`does not run
`at hundreds
`of amperes
`
`EX1062 (Power-Supply Management—Principles, Problems, and Parts) at 13.
`
`VDD, VDDL, and VDDQ are each
`supplied to the same devices
`
`Petition (918) at 31.
`Petition (054) at 30.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 49
`
`
`
`Petitioner Has Not Established A POSITA Would Have Used Separate
`Buck Converters For VDD/VDDQ/VDDL or VCC/VCCFBD
`
`System-
`Board-
`Specific
`Voltage
`Level
`
`EX1028, 11.
`
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 16.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 17.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 50
`
`
`
`Petitioner Has Not Established A POSITA Would Have Further Modified
`Harris+FBDIMM With Separate Buck Converters Given Space Constraints
`
`EX1026 (Harris), [0010].
`
`X 4
`
`EX1078, 23.
`
`EX2042, 7.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 20; Patent Owner Response (054) at 22.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 12; Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 13.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 51
`
`
`
`FBDIMM Form Factor
`
`Petition (918) at 11; Petition (054) at 10-11.
`EX1028 (918, 054) at 25-26, 105.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 52
`
`
`
`
`
`The 918 PetitionThe 918 Petition
`
`Voltage mappings that require
`using separate converters for
`the same voltage level under
`Petitioner’s theory
`
`Petition (918) at 26.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 53
`
`
`
`
`
`The 054 PetitionThe 054 Petition
`
`Voltage mappings that require
`using separate converters for
`the same voltage level under
`Petitioner’s theory
`
`Petition (054) at 27.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 54
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Own Evidence Shows that Single Buck Converter
`Outputting Multiple Voltages Were Known
`
`Single buck converter
`receiving only Vin (1) and
`outputting different Vout2
`and Vout3
`
`EX1048, 2 (annotated).
`
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 14; Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 15.
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 18; Patent Owner Response (054) at 20-21.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 55
`
`
`
`What Defines a Buck Converter
`
`A buck converter needs “an LC-filter
`just after the power switch ….”
`EX2020, p.22. Thus, the number of
`inductors reflects the number of buck
`converters.
`See EX1078, 12 (LC filter); EX1075, 129:13-19.
`
`Single Buck Converter
`
`Inductor
`
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 14.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 15.
`
`EX1048, 2 (shows two buck converters, each with its own inductor).
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 56
`
`
`
`Single Buck Converters Can Generate Multiple Voltages
`
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 14; Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 15.
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 18; Patent Owner Response (054) at 21.
`
`EX2003 at 2.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`EX2004 at 99 (pdf page 11).
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 57
`
`
`
`Evidence of Multi-Converter Chips Cited By Petitioner
`
`EX1078, at 1.
`Patent Owner’s Sur-Reply (918) at 12-13; Patent Owner’s Sur-Reply (054) at 12-13.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 58
`
`
`
`Harris Expressly Discloses Using a Single Converter to Provide Multiple Voltages
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0010].
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 17.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 20.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 59
`
`
`
`In Netlist Patents A Dual Buck Converter Has Two Buck Converters
`
`Patent Owner’s Sur-Reply (918) at 13.
`EX1001 (918) at 38:25, 38:29, 38:53-55.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 60
`
`
`
`Harris’ Claims Confirm a Single Module Can Supply Multiple Voltages
`
`EX1023 (Harris), Claim 1.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 61
`
`
`
`Absent Further Modification, Harris+FBDIMM Would Not
`Use Separate Converters For Each Voltage
`
`
`
`’918 IPR’918 IPR
`
`Harris’ existing system
`
`At most only 2 more
`regulators needed
`under Petition’s
`theory
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 18.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 62
`
`
`
`Absent Further Modification, Harris+FBDIMM Would Not
`Use Separate Converters For Each Voltage
`
`
`
`’054 IPR’054 IPR
`
`Harris’ existing system
`
`At most only 1 more
`regulator needed
`under Petition’s
`theory
`
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 21.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 63
`
`
`
`Voltage Mapping C Fails: Harris Does Not Generate VTT On-Module
`And A POSA Would Not Be Motivated to Modify Harris To Do So
`
`The 918 Petition
`
`Petition (918) at 26.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 64
`
`
`
`Voltage Mapping C Fails: Harris Does Not Generate VTT On-Module
`And A POSA Would Not Be Motivated to Modify Harris To Do So
`
`The 054 Petition
`
`Petition (054) at 27.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 65
`
`
`
`Harris Does Not Teach Or Suggest Generating VTT On-Module
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0012].
`
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 17-18.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 19-20.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 66
`
`EX1023 (Harris), FIG. 1A.
`
`
`
`Vtt Is Never Supplied to DRAM
`
`Harris Proposes On Module Vdd
`to DRAM
`
`DRAM does not receive Vtt
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0009].
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 52.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 55-56.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 67
`
`EX1026 (DDR2 SDRAM), at 1.
`
`
`
`A POSA Would Have Had Specific Reasons Not to Generate VTT On-Module
`
`William
`Mangione-Smith
`Netlist’s Expert
`
`“[S]upplying VTT from the motherboard would ensure that all DIMMs
`connected to the same memory controller would have the same
`termination voltages …. This would also eliminate undesirable ground
`loops between the DIMMs, on the one hand, and between the DIMM
`and the motherboard, on the other hand.”
`
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶96.
`EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶96.
`
`“VTT supply must sink and source current…. The design complexity
`would favor having a single regulator for a group of DIMMs rather
`than one regulator per DIMM.”
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶97.
`EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶97.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 28.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 31-32.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 68
`
`
`
`EX1026, at 49
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 52.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 55-56.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 69
`
`
`
`A POSA Would Not Generate VTT Using A Buck Converter
`
`VTT was typically generated by an LDO
`
`EX2006 (Micron Technical Note), at 7.
`
`
`
`See also EX2007-2010, EX2050 (linear VTT regulators that generate VTT from VDDQ).See also EX2007-2010, EX2050 (linear VTT regulators that generate VTT from VDDQ).
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 29-30.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 32-33.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 70
`
`
`
`There Are Specific Reasons To Use An LDO To Generate VTT
`
`William
`Mangione-Smith
`Netlist’s Expert
`
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶99.
`EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶99.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 29-30.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 32-33.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 71
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s VTT Examples Are For On Board Termination
`
`VDDQ of 2.5V
`is for DDR1*
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 40.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 42.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 30.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 30-31.
`
`EX1040, p. 18
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`*EX1003 (918) Wolfe Decl., ¶139
`EX1003 (054) Wolfe Decl., ¶140
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 72
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s VTT Examples Are For On Board Termination
`
`VDDQ of 2.5V
`is for DDR1*
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 40; Patent Owner Response (054) at 42.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 30; Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 30-31.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`EX1041, p. 2
`
`*EX1003 (918) Wolfe Decl., ¶139
`EX1003 (054) Wolfe Decl., ¶140
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 73
`
`
`
`EX1040 and EX1041 Do Not Suggest Using Buck Converters in FBDIMMs
`
`William
`Mangione-Smith
`Netlist’s Expert
`
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶100.
`EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶100.
`
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 18.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 19-20.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 74
`
`
`
`A POSA Would Not Use a Separate On Module Converter
`For VDDSPD
`
`The 918 Petition
`
`Petition (918) at 26.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 75
`
`
`
`Harris Does Not Teach Or Suggest Generating VDDSPD Using Separate Regulator
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0012].
`
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 17-18.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 19-20.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 76
`
`EX1023 (Harris), FIG. 1A.
`
`
`
`3.3V Is a Standard Power Rail Available On System Boards
`
`•
`
`“3.3V is a common power rail on the motherboard such that it can be supplied to FBDIMMs
`without the increased cost and problems associated with providing a regulator for each of
`Harris’ modified FBDIMM memory boards” EX2031, ¶102.
`
`William
`Mangione-Smith
`Netlist’s Expert
`
`EX2038 Intel System Board, at 17
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 30-31.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 77
`
`
`
`Single SMBus on System Board Used for All SPDS on all FBDIMMs
`
`• “[I]f VDDSPD voltages are supplied by different regulators to the SMBus
`controller on the motherboard and individual DIMMs, they cannot
`track each other and would lead to communication problems when
`they are actually at different voltage potentials.” EX2031, ¶102.
`
`William
`Mangione-Smith
`Netlist’s Expert
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 30-31.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 78
`
`
`
`A POSA Would Not Use An On-Module Buck Converter To
`Generate VDDSPD
`• “[T]he low current level required by components using
`VDDSPD means that buck converters would be very
`inefficient.” EX2031, ¶103.
`
`• Buck converter: “efficiency less than 20% at 10mA current”
`
`William
`Mangione-Smith
`Netlist’s Expert
`
`• LDO: “An LDO with a12V-input-3.3V-output would be 26%
`efficient.”
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 30-31.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 79
`
`
`
`Use of Buck Converters Is Entirely Hindsight
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0010].
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 4, 8, 16-17.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 5, 10-11, 19-20.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 80
`
`
`
`Petitioner Argues That General References to Step Converters Does Not
`Inherently Disclose Buck Converters
`
`Petition (918) at 4.
`Petition (054) at 4.
`
`EX1003 (918, 054) (Wolfe Declaration), ¶53.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 81
`
`
`
`TOPICS
`
`GROUNDS 1-3
`Harris Does Not Receive Power Via Edge Connections
`Harris Does Not Receive The Recited Signals From the Host
`A POSITA Would Not Have Used the Required # of (Buck) Converters
`Ground 2 ASSUMES Separate Converters To Supply Each FBDIMM-Required Voltage
`A POSITA Would Not Have Replaced Harris’ Redundant Power
`Additional Reasons Why Dependent Claims Are Not Obvious
`
`GROUNDS 4-5
`The Recited “Memory Module” Means A Main Memory Module
`Spiers’ PCI Card Is Not a Memory Module
`POSITA Would Not Use DDR2/DDR3 or Recited # of (Buck) Converters
`Additional Reasons Why Dependent Claims Are Not Obvious
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 82
`
`
`
`Amidi Does Not Use Separate On Board Converters for Memory Module Voltages
`
`EX1024 (Amidi) at 7:52-59.
`
`EX1024 (Amidi) at FIG. 6.
`
`Petition (918) at 6, 79 (citing EX1003 at ¶196).
`Petition (054) at 6-7, 72-73 (citing EX1003 at ¶196).
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 83
`
`
`
`Ground 2 Still Assumes Motivation to Use
`Separate Converters For Each FBDIMM Required Voltage
`
`Petition (918) at 75.
`Petition (054) at 67.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 84
`
`
`
`TOPICS
`
`GROUNDS 1-3
`Harris Does Not Receive Power Via Edge Connections
`Harris Does Not Receive The Recited Signals From the Host
`A POSITA Would Not Have Used the Required # of (Buck) Converters
`Ground 2 ASSUMES Separate Converters To Supply Each FBDIMM-Required Voltage
`A POSITA Would Not Have Replaced Harris’ Redundant Power
`Additional Reasons Why Dependent Claims Are Not Obvious
`
`GROUNDS 4-5
`The Recited “Memory Module” Means A Main Memory Module
`Spiers’ PCI Card Is Not a Memory Module
`POSITA Would Not Use DDR2/DDR3 or Recited # of (Buck) Converters
`Additional Reasons Why Dependent Claims Are Not Obvious
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 85
`
`
`
`Harris Already Provides Redundant Power to the Memory Module
`
`External voltage source can be battery
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0014].
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0014].
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 32.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 34-35.
`
`EX1023 (Harris), FIG. 1B.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 86
`
`
`
`Harris’ Redundancy Implementation Provides Backup Power Using Redundant
`Input Voltages
`
`William
`Mangione-Smith
`Netlist’s Expert
`
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶107.
`EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶105.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 34.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 87
`
`
`
`Dr. Wolfe Agrees: Harris’ Existing Redundancy Implementation
`is Functionally Similar to Amidi’s Backup Power Supply
`
`Harris
`
`Andrew Wolfe
`Samsung’s Expert
`
`EX1003 (918) (Wolfe Declaration), ¶170.
`EX1003 (054) (Wolfe Declaration), ¶172.
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 34.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 36.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 88
`
`
`
`Petition: Amidi’s Backup Power Supply Is Functioning
`“In the Same Way” As Harris’ Redundant Implementation
`
`
`
`The PetitionThe Petition
`
`Petition (918) at 55.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 89
`
`
`
`A POSA Would Not Have Preferred On Module Battery
`Backup
`
`• “[U]sing Amidi’s battery only results in additional and unnecessary complexity, with
`Harris’s 12V external source having to be stepped-down with a buck converter to 5V
`for Amidi’s battery, only to then be stepped back up with a boost converter to 12V.
`EX2031, ¶108.
`
`• The ’918 patent notes that “batteries may require maintenance, may need to be
`replaced, are not environmentally friendly, and the status of batteries can be difficult
`to monitor.” EX1001, 4:56-58; Id.
`
`• “Amidi’s battery backup solution would require a substantial amount of on-board
`space ….” EX2031, ¶108.
`
`• “[A] battery backup solution would also be able to provide backup power for only a
`finite period of time based on the battery’s capacity. This would represent an
`inadequate solution for power interrupts which last longer.” Id., ¶109.
`
`William
`Mangione-Smith
`Netlist’s Expert
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 30-31.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 90
`
`
`
`TOPICS
`
`GROUNDS 1-3
`Harris Does Not Receive Power Via Edge Connections
`Harris Does Not Receive The Recited Signals From the Host
`A POSITA Would Not Have Used the Required # of (Buck) Converters
`Ground 2 ASSUMES Separate Converters To Supply Each FBDIMM-Required Voltage
`A POSITA Would Not Have Replaced Harris’ Redundant Power
`Additional Reasons Why Dependent Claims Are Not Obvious
`
`GROUNDS 4-5
`The Recited “Memory Module” Means A Main Memory Module
`Spiers’ PCI Card Is Not a Memory Module
`POSITA Would Not Use DDR2/DDR3 or Recited # of (Buck) Converters
`Additional Reasons Why Dependent Claims Are Not Obvious
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 91
`
`
`
`’918 Claims 5-7, 9-13, 16-22, 24-27:
`Trigger Signal Produced In Response to Detecting Over-voltage
`
`
`
`The ’918 PatentThe ’918 Patent
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 92
`
`
`
`’054 Claims 6-7, 11-12, 17, 29:
`Trigger Signal Produced In Response to Detecting Over-voltage
`
`
`
`The ’054 PatentThe ’054 Patent
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 93
`
`
`
`Petition: Harris Allegedly Teaches Detecting Over/Under Voltages
`
`
`
`The PetitionThe Petition
`
`Petition (918) at 62.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 94
`
`
`
`Harris’ ± 15% Is a Design Tolerance, Not Detection of Over/Under Voltages
`
`EX1023 (Harris), [0013].
`
`EX2031 (918) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶116.
`EX2061 (054) (Mangione-Smith Declaration), ¶113.
`
`And no trigger signal is produced in Harris if supply voltage exceeds design tolerance And no trigger signal is produced in Harris if supply voltage exceeds design tolerance
`
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 39.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 40-41.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 95
`
`
`
`Petition: Allegedly Well-Known to Detect Over/Under Voltages
`
`The Petition
`
`Petition (918) at 62.
`Petition (054) at 54.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 96
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Evidence Shows That Allegedly Suitable
`Regulators Did Not Detect Over-Voltage
`Undervoltage, but no
`Overvoltage detection
`
`EX1078, 1, 3.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (918) at 20.
`Patent Owner Sur-Reply (054) at 21.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 97
`
`
`
`Wide Input Voltage Tolerance Obviates the Need for Over-Voltage Detection
`
`EX1040.
`
`EX1041.
`Patent Owner Response (918) at 40.
`Patent Owner Response (054) at 42.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE
`
`Ex. 2063, p. 98
`
`
`
`High Upper Limit on Input Voltage
`Obviates the Need for Over-Voltage Detection
`
`117. … [V]oltage regulators that Samsung alleges are suitable for use
`with Harris do not detect input overvoltage, as Dr. Wolfe confirmed.
`See EX2030, 58:24-61:12; EX1040; EX1041…. An unregulated 12V
`voltage source with ±15% wide tolerance has an expected voltage
`range of 10.2 – 13.8V. The 28V upper limit for the converters in
`EX1040 is well above the 13.8V upper range. So is the
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
