`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