Case 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61 Filed 02/26/19 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:1305
`
`Andrew G. Strickland (CA SBN: 272364)
`Andrew.Strickland@leehayes.com
`William B. Dyer III (Pro Hac Vice)
`Bill.Dyer@leehayes.com
`LEE & HAYES, P.C.
`1175 Peachtree Street
`100 Colony Square, Suite 2000
`Atlanta, GA 30361
`Tel: (404) 736-1925/Fax: (404) 815-1700
`Marc E. Hankin (SBN: 170505)
`Marc@HankinPatentLaw.com
`Anooj Patel (SBN: 300297)
`Anooj@HankinPatentLaw.com
`HANKIN PATENT LAW, APC
`4299 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 100
`Newport Beach, CA 92660
`Tel: (949) 251-0898; Fax: (310) 979-3603
`Attorneys for Plaintiff,
`MEMORY TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
`Christopher Kao (SBN 237716)
`christopher.kao@pillsburylaw.com
`Brock S. Weber (SBN 261383)
`brock.weber@pillsburylaw.com
`PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW
`PITTMAN LLP
`Four Embarcadero Center, 22nd Floor
`San Francisco, CA 94111-5998
`Tel: 415.983.1000; Fax: 415.983.1200
`Christine Yang (SBN 102048)
`chrisyang@sjclawpc.com
`LAW OFFICE OF S.J. CHRISTINE
`YANG
`17220 Newhope Street, Suite 101-102
`Fountain Valley, CA 92708
`Tel: 714.641.4022; Fax: 714.641.2082
`Attorneys for Defendants,
`KINGSTON TECHNOLOGY
`CORPORATION,
`and KINGSTON TECHNOLOGY
`COMPANY, INC.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`Case No. 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE
`
`JOINT REPORT ON CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTION ISSUES
`FOLLOWING CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTION HEARING
`
`MEMORY TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, a
`Nevada company,
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`KINGSTON TECHNOLOGY
`CORPORATION, a California
`corporation, KINGSTON
`TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, INC. a
`Delaware corporation,
`
`Defendants.
`
`Memory Techs. Exhibit 2001
`Kingston Tech. Co., Inc. v. Memory Techs. LLC
`Joint Report on Claim Construction Issues Following Claim Construction Hearing
`IPR2019-00644
`Case No.: 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE4841-3160-5385.v1
`
`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 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61 Filed 02/26/19 Page 2 of 5 Page ID #:1306
`
`Plaintiff Memory Technologies, LLC (“MTL” or “Plaintiff”) and Defendants
`Kingston Technology Corporation and Kingston Technology Company, Inc.
`(collectively, “Kingston” or “Defendants”) submit this Joint Report On Claim
`Construction Issues as directed by the Court during the February 12, 2019 Claim
`Construction Hearing.
`On February 14, 2019, the parties met and conferred and agreed to narrow
`the issues in dispute for the claim terms below or agree to the claim constructions
`below.
`I.
`U.S. PAT. NO. RE45,542
`A.
`“maximum power consumption [of / for] the peripheral device”
`The parties agree to the following claim construction for “maximum power
`consumption [of / for] the peripheral device”:
`“a level of power consumption that the peripheral device adjusts its
`operational functions not to exceed.” (Claim Construction Hearing Tr., Feb. 12,
`2019, at 50:23-51:1.)
`U.S. PAT. NOS. 8,307,180; 9,063,850; 9,367,486
`II.
`A.
`“predefined access profiles”
`While the parties have not agreed to a claim construction of “predefined
`access profiles,” they have narrowed the issues in dispute. The parties proposed
`constructions for “predefined access profiles” following the February 14, 2019
`meet and confer are:
`MTL
`“mode, setting, control, or logic
`defined in advance corresponding to
`one or more types of reading, writing,
`modifying, deleting, or changing the
`attributes of the data that reside on the
`memory”
`
`Kingston
`“mode, setting, control, or logic
`defined in advance for reading, writing,
`modifying, deleting, or changing the
`attributes of data”
`
`1
`Joint Report on Claim Construction Issues Following Claim Construction Hearing
`Case No.: 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE
`
`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 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61 Filed 02/26/19 Page 3 of 5 Page ID #:1307
`
`
`
`As discussed during the Claim Construction Hearing, the remaining dispute
`between their constructions of “predefined access profiles” is whether the “access
`profiles” concern “attributes of data” (Kingston) or “attributes of data that reside
`on the memory” (MTL). In other words, this dispute concerns whether the “access
`profiles” relates to the memory device (Kingston), or the physical memory of the
`memory device (MTL), as set forth in the parties’ briefing and argument at the
`Claim Construction Hearing.
`B.
`“usage”
`The parties agree to the following claim construction for “usage”:
`“usage by a host device.”
`C.
`“the memory device is configured according to the at least one
`predefined access profile” / “how access to [said / the] memory
`device is configured”
`The parties agree that claim terms “the memory device is configured
`according to the at least one predefined access profile” / “how access to [said / the]
`memory device is configured” should be given their plain and ordinary meaning.
`The parties agree that the plain and ordinary meaning of the claim terms will
`be consistent with the Court’s claim construction of “predetermined access
`profiles”—i.e., if the Court finds that “predetermined access profiles” concern
`“attributes of data that reside on the memory” (MTL), then “configured” will refer
`to memory of the memory device, and if the Court finds that “predetermined
`access profiles” concern “attributes of data” (Kingston), then “configured” will
`refer to the memory device.
`III. ALL OTHER TERMS
`For all other terms in dispute, the parties did not reach agreement. The
`parties request the Court to consider each party’s respective arguments and issue a
`claim construction ruling. For the convenience of the Court, the remaining terms in
`dispute are provided in Exhibit A to this Joint Report.
`
`2
`Joint Report on Claim Construction Issues Following Claim Construction Hearing
`Case No.: 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE
`
`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 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61 Filed 02/26/19 Page 4 of 5 Page ID #:1308
`
`
`
`IV. OTHER UPDATES
`The parties would also like to apprise the Court that Kingston has filed
`petitions for Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) on all asserted claims of the eight
`patents-in-suit. Kingston’s IPR petitions were filed during the period of January
`29-31, 2019.
`Kingston requests the Court’s guidance on whether it will entertain a motion
`to stay pending IPR before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”)
`enters Institution Decisions in the IPR proceedings. Kingston expects Institution
`Decisions to start to be entered in approximately five-to-six months.
`MTL would likely oppose any motion to stay that is filed before the USPTO
`enters Institution Decisions.
`
`Dated: February 26, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`LEE & HAYES P.C.
`By: /s/Andrew G. Strickland
`
`
`Andrew G. Strickland (CA SBN 272364)
`William B. Dyer III (Pro Hac Vice)
`1175 Peachtree Street, NE
`100 Colony Square, Suite 2000
`Atlanta, GA 30361
`Attorneys for Plaintiff,
`MEMORY TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
` PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW
`PITTMAN LLP
`
`
`By: /s/ Brock S. Weber
`
`
`Christopher Kao (SBN 237716)
`christopher.kao@pillsburylaw.com
`Brock S. Weber (SBN 261383)
`brock.weber@pillsburylaw.com
`Four Embarcadero Center, 22nd Floor
`San Francisco, CA 94111-5998
`Tel: 415.983.1000 / Fax: 415.983.1200
`Attorneys for Defendants,
`KINGSTON TECHNOLOGY
`CORPORATION AND KINGSTON
`TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: February 26, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`Joint Report on Claim Construction Issues Following Claim Construction Hearing
`Case No.: 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE
`
`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 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61 Filed 02/26/19 Page 5 of 5 Page ID #:1309
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`I hereby certify that on the 26th day of February, 2019, the foregoing
`document was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court for the UNITED
`STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, using
`the Court’s Electronic Case Filing (ECF) system. The ECF system routinely sends
`a “notice of Electronic Filing” to all attorneys of record who have consented to
`accept this notice as service of this document by electronic means.
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /s/Andrew G. Strickland
`Andrew G. Strickland (CA SBN 272364)
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`Email: andrew.strickland@leehayes.com
`
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`4
`Joint Report on Claim Construction Issues Following Claim Construction Hearing
`Case No.: 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61-1 Filed 02/26/19 Pageiofi0 PageID
`#:1310
`EXHIBIT A
`
`PROPOSED CONSTRUCTIONS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOR DISPUTED CLAIM TERMS
`
`U.S. Pat. No. RE45,486
`
`Claim TermRE4860 [MTLKingstom
`A technique of determining or generating addressesthat
`“basic addressing
`“a method of mapping one or more memory locations
`correspond to one or more memory locations.”
`per address”
`
`Claims 6, 23, 30, 31
`
`Intrinsic
`
`Intrinsic
`
`1 “
`
`RE486Patent at 1:38-48, 3:1-33, 3:38-41, 5:33-52, 6:45-65, 7:5-
`15,
`7:49-55, 8:37-49, 9:39-61, Claims.
`
`RE486 Patent: 1:55-67, 2:17-67, 3:1-46, 6:2-10, 7:62-
`67.
`
`RE486 Patent File History: August 12, 2014 Response
`to Office Action.
`
`’669 Patent File History: January 8, 2007 Response to
`Office Action.
`
`Extrinsic
`
`Prosecution history of original U.S. Patent No. 7,257,669 at
`10/06/2006 Response to Office Action; 1/12/2007 Response to
`Office Action.
`
`Prosecution history of RE486 Patent at 5/12/2014 Response to
`Office Action.
`
`McAlexander Declaration from 337-ta-1034 ff 74-101.
`
`Extrinsic
`
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary, (Fourth Edition, 1999) and
`(Fifth Edition, 2002) (definitions of “address,” “addressing”).
`
`Oxford Dictionary of Computing (Fourth Edition, 1996)
`(definitions of “address,” “addressing”).
`
`IBM Dictionary of Computing (1994) (definitions of “address,”
`“addressing’”’).
`
`

`

`2 “
`
`Oxford Dictionary of Computing (Fourth Edition, 1996)
`(definitions of “address,” “addressing”).
`IBM Dictionary of Computing (1994) (definitions of “address,”
`“addressing”).
`
`RE486 Patent: Abstract, Fig. 2, 1:20-2:12, 2:17-67, 3:1-
`46, 3:55-56, 5:38-6:39, 7:49-8:36, 9:29-38.
`
`RE486 Patent File History: August 12, 2014 Response
`to Office Action.
`
`Intrinsic
`
`RE486 Patent at 1:38-48, 3:1-33, 3:38-41, 5:33-52, 6:45-65, 7:5-
`15, 7:49-55, 8:37-49, 9:39-61, Claims.
`
`669 Patent File History: January 8, 2007 Response to
`Office Action.
`
`Prosecution history of original U.S. Patent No. 7,257,669 at
`10/06/2006 Response to Office Action; 1/12/2007 Response to
`Office Action.
`
`File History of WO 2004/07506S.
`
`Extrinsic
`
`McAlexander Declaration from 337-ta-1034 {| 77-95,
`102-21
`
`Prosecution history of RE486 Patent at 5/12/2014 Response to
`Office Action.
`
`Extrinsic
`
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary, (Fourth Edition, 1999) and
`(Fifth Edition, 2002) (definitions of “address,” “addressing’’).
`
`Webster's Third New International Dictionary (Unabridged)
`(1993)
`> cc
`“expanded”’).
`definitions of “expand,”
`“The memory card supportsat least a basic addressing method
`Plain and ordinary meaning and no further construction
`“the memory card
`needed beyond claim terms already proposed for
`further configured to
`and an expanded addressing method, andis configured to store
`
`have stored therein an__|construction.
`
`Case 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61-1 Filed 02/26/19 Page 2of10 Page ID
`
`Claim TermRE4860|MTL0Kiimgstom
`A technique of determining or generating addressesthat
`“expanded addressing|“a method of mapping two or more memory locations
`per address”
`correspondto a larger number of memory locations than the
`basic addressing method.”
`
`Claims 6, 23, 25, 30,
`
`Intrinsic
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61-1 Filed 02/26/19 Page3of10 PageID
`Claim TermRE486 [MTDKingston
`addressing data, said
`addressing data being
`indicative ofat least
`one addressing method
`supported”
`
`methods.”
`
`Intrinsic
`
`Intrinsic dataindicating at least one of the supported addressing
`
`wherein the
`addressing data
`indicates either a basic
`addressing method or
`an expandedaddressing
`
`Claims 6, 30, 31
`
`“memory location”
`
`All asserted claims
`
`“a location in memory having a specific size”
`
`RE486 Patent at 1:38-48, 3:1-33, 3:38-41, 5:33-52, 6:45-65, 7:5-
`15, 7:49-55, 8:37-49, 9:39-61, Claims.
`
`Prosecution history of original U.S. Patent No. 7,257,669 at
`10/06/2006 Response to Office Action; 1/12/2007 Response to
`Office Action.
`
`Prosecution history of RE486 Patent at 5/12/2014 Response to
`Office Action.
`
`Extrinsic
`
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary, (Fourth Edition, 1999) and
`(Fifth
`Edition, 2002) (definitions of “address,” “addressing”).
`
`Oxford Dictionary of Computing (Fourth Edition, 1996)
`(definitions of “address,” “addressing”).
`
`IBM Dictionary of Computing (1994) (definitions of “address,”
`“addressing”).
`
`Webster's Third New International Dictionary
`idged)(1993)
`(definitions of “expand,”“expanded”).
`“a location in memory where data may be stored.”
`
`Intrinsic
`
`

`

`4 R
`
`Case 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61-1 Filed 02/26/19 Page4of10 Page ID
`
`Claim TermRE4860|MTL|Kiimgstom
`E486 Patent at 1:62-67, 5:50-51, 8:5-17, 8:31-35, Claims.
`RE486Patent: Abstract, Fig. 2, 1:20-2:12, 2:17-67, 3:1-
`46, 3:55-56, 5:26-6:10, 7:49-8:36, 9:29-38.
`
`Extrinsic
`
`Extrinsic
`
`Dictionary of Personal Computing and the Internet,
`Third Edition, definition of “address.”
`
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary, (Fourth Edition, 1999) and
`(Fifth Edition, 2002) (definitions of “address,” “addressing,”
`“memory,” “location”).
`
`MultiMediaCard System Specification, Versions 3.1 at
`19-21.
`
`Oxford Dictionary of Computing (Fourth Edition, 1996)
`(definitions of “address,” “addressing,” “memory,” “location”).
`
`McAlexander Declaration from 337-ta-1034 J 136-49.
`
`“addressing data”
`
`All asserted claims
`
`“one or more consecutive bits of data that indicates
`which addressing method is supported betweenat least a
`basic addressing methodor an expanded addressing
`method”
`
`Intrinsic
`
`RE486 Patent: 5:51-57, 6:21-26, 9:39-58.
`
`RE486 Patent File History: August 12, 2014 Response
`to Office Action.
`
`669 Patent File History: January 8, 2007 Response to
`Office Action.
`
`File History of WO 2004/075065.
`
`Extrinsic
`
`McAlexander Declaration from 337-ta-1034 §§ 122-35
`
`Noconstruction necessary / plain and ordinary meaning
`
`Intrinsic
`
`RE486Patent at 1:62-67, 5:50-59, Claims.
`
`Extrinsic
`
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary, (Fourth Edition, 1999) and
`(Fifth Edition, 2002) (definitions of “address,” “addressing,”
`“data,” “memory,” “location”).
`
`Oxford Dictionary of Computing (Fourth Edition, 1996)
`(definitions of “address,” “addressing,” data,” “memory,”
`“location’”).
`
`IBM Dictionary of Computing (1994) (definitions of “address,”
`“addressing,” “data,” “memory,” “location”).
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61-1 Filed 02/26/19 Page5of10 PageID
`#:1314
`
`U.S. Pat. No. RE45,542
`
`ClaimTerm(MTXKimgstom
`amefunction andstructure as “means for setting” in Claim 28,
`Not a 112(6) term:
`“wherein the means for
`setting the maximum power
`and therefore this dependent Claim 38 is invalid becauseit fails to
`consumption of the peripheral
`narrow independent Claim 28. See 35 U.S.C. § 112(4).
`device comprises a processor
`operable to set the maximum
`power consumption of the
`peripheral device to the
`
`“a processor operable to set the maximum power
`consumption of the peripheral device [to a value
`whichis in a range from said default value to
`said limiting value, said range including said
`default value and said limiting value]”
`
`Intrinsic
`
`5 S
`
`RES542 Patent at Abstract, 1:44-3:67, 2:49-59, 4:57-59, 6:6-30,
`6:27-30, Figs. 1, 2, and 3, Claims.
`
`Intrinsic
`
`RES542 Patent: Fig. 1, Fig. 3, 2:49-59, 4:57-59,
`5:55-6:30, 7:31-8:19
`
`Baker Declaration at 4960-83.
`
`Extrinsic
`
`RES542File History: June 30, 2014 Response to
`Office Action; Declaration of Kimmo Mylly:
`November6, 2014 Response to Office Action.
`
`Extrinsic
`
`McAlexander Declaration from 337-ta-1034 9
`56-72.
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61-1 Filed 02/26/19 Page6o0f10 Page ID
`#:1315
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 7,565,469
`
`Claim Term °469 MTRKimgston
`“first information portion”
`Plain and ordinary meaning:“a first portion of
`“State of a busy signalata first time.”
`the information”
`
`?469 Patent: Abstract; 4:4-15; 4:43-58.
`
`McAlexander Declaration from 337-ta-1034 J
`30-42.
`
`Intrinsic
`
`°469 Patent at 1:24-3:31, 3:47-56, 4:4-15, 4:16-29, 4:42-57, 5:1-
`13, 5:14-20, 5:26-29, 5:41-6:6, Figs. 1 and 2, Claims.
`
`Prosecution history of ’469 Patent at 12/26/2007 Response to
`Office Action; 8/11/2008 Response to Office Action; 2/17/2009
`Pre-Brief Conference Request; 4/21/2009 Responseto Office
`Action.
`
`Plain and ordinary meaning: “‘a second, or
`another, portion of the information”
`
`“State of the busy signal at a second time.”
`
`Intrinsic
`
`Claims 19, 20
`
`“second information portion’
`
`>
`
`Claims 19, 20
`
`“first meaning”
`
`Claims 19, 20
`
`13, 5:14-20, 5:26-29, 5:41-6:6, Figs. 1 and 2, Claims.
`
`7469 Patent: Abstract; 4:4-15: 4:43-58; 5:14-20.
`
`McAlexander Declaration from 337-ta-1034 J
`30-42.
`
`“a first status of a busy [or ready] signal as
`expressed by the memory device and then
`interpreted by the host.”[1.e., “buffer
`busy/ready”
`
`’469 Patent: Fig. 2, 4:6-15, 4:43-55, 5:14-20,
`6:23-31.
`
`469 Patent at 1:24-3:31, 3:47-56, 4:4-15, 4:16-29, 4:42-57, 5:1-
`13, 5:14-20, 5:26-29, 5:41-6:6, Figs. 1 and 2, Claims.
`
`Prosecution history of ’469 Patent at 12/26/2007 Response to
`Office Action; 8/11/2008 Response to Office Action; 2/17/2009
`Pre-Brief Conference Request; 4/21/2009 Responseto Office
`Action.
`“An indication by the memory device ofa first condition of the
`memory device.”
`
`Intrinsic
`
`469 Patent at 1:24-3:31, 3:47-56, 4:4-15, 4:16-29, 4:42-57, 5:1-
`
`

`

`7 P
`
`McAlexander Declaration from 337-ta-1034 J
`30-42.
`“another status of a busy [or ready] signal as
`expressed by the memory device and then
`interpreted by the host.”[1-e., “programming
`busy/ready”
`
`“An indication by the memory device of a second condition of the
`memory device.”
`
`Intrinsic
`
`’469 Patent at 1:24-3:31, 3:47-56, 4:4-15, 4:16-29, 4:42-57, 5:1-
`13, 5:14-20, 5:26-29, 5:41-6:6, Figs. 1 and 2, Claims.
`Prosecution history of ’469 Patent at 12/26/2007 Response to
`Office Action; 8/11/2008 Response to Office Action; 2/17/2009
`
`Pre-Brief Conference Request; 4/21/2009 Response to Office
`Action.
`
`Case 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61-1 Filed 02/26/19 Page 7of10 PageID
`
`Claim Term 469 MTRKingston
`December 23, 2007 Response to Office Action;
`rosecution history of ’469 Patent at 12/26/2007 Response to
`August 7, 2008 Response to Office Action; April
`Office Action; 8/11/2008 Response to Office Action; 2/17/2009
`Pre-Brief Conference Request; 4/21/2009 Responseto Office
`16, 2009 Amendments / Remarks.
`Action.
`
`“second meaning”
`
`Claims 19, 20
`
`’469 Patent: Fig. 2, 4:6-15, 4:43-55, 5:14-20,
`6:23-31.
`
`December23, 2007 Response to Office Action;
`August 7, 2008 Response to Office Action; April
`16, 2009 Amendments / Remarks.
`
`Microsoft Encarta College Dictionary, 2001;
`Cambridge Dictionary of American English,
`2000; Random House Webster’s Unabridged
`Dictionary, Second Edition, 2001 (definitions of
`“different” and “meaning”)
`
`McAlexander Declaration from 337-ta-1034 J
`30-42.
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61-1 Filed 02/26/19 Page 8of10 Page ID
`#:1317
`
`USS.Pat. No. 8,307,180
`
`Claim Term °180 PMTKingston
`mode, setting, control, or logic defined in advance for reading,
`“Tpredefined] access
`“mode, setting, control, or logic defined in
`profile(s)”
`advance corresponding to one or more types of
`writing, modifying, deleting, or changingtheattributes of data”
`reading, writing, modifying, deleting, or
`changingthe attributes of the data that reside on
`the memory”
`
`Claims 1, 2, 3, 5, 12, 16, 17,
`18, 19, 21, 28, 32, 35
`
`Intrinsic
`
`8 “
`
`?180 Patent at Abstract, 1:13-2:67, 3:31-34, 3:45-60, 4:43-66,
`5:14-19, 5:3-5, 5:36-44, 6:22-25, 7:15-18, 7:32-36, Figs. 3 and 4,
`Claims.
`
`Prosecution history of the ’180 Patent at 4/18/2011 Response to
`Office Action; 9/6/2011 Response to Office Action; 10/6/2011
`Pre-Brief Conference Request; 6/11/2012 Responseto Office
`Action.
`
`180 Patent: Abstract, 1:13-20, 1:60-64, 1:65-
`2:11, 2:40-44, 2:32-35, 3:37-46, 4:25-29 (Fig. 5),
`4:51-58, 5:6-19, 5:36-6:55 (Figs. 3-4), 7:32-45.
`
`’180 Patent File History: April 11, 2011
`Response to Office Action; September 6, 2011
`Response to Final Office Action; October6,
`2011 Pre-Appeal Request for Review; June 7,
`2012 Response to Office Action.
`McAlexander Declaration from 337-ta-1034 J
`163-205.
`
`Microsoft Computer Dictionary, Fifth Edition
`(definitions of “access”
`
`“wherein said one or more
`access profiles are adapted to
`producean optimized
`performanceassociated with
`said memory device”
`
`Claims 5, 21
`
`“wherein the one or more accessprofiles [as
`defined above] are designed to produce an
`improved memory device performance with
`higherreliability, increased speed, increased
`lifetime, or reduced energy consumption, than
`comparedto the same memory device not
`implementing said one or moreaccessprofiles”
`
`Indefinite
`
`Intrinsic
`
`?180 Patent at Abstract, 1:13-2:67, 3:37-45, 3:56-4:4, 5:61-63,
`6:6-7, Figs. 3-5, Claims.
`Prosecution history of the ’180 Patent at 4/18/2011 Response to
`Office Action: 9/6/2011 Response to Office Action; 10/6/2011
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61-1 Filed 02/26/19 Page9of10 Page ID
`
`Claim Term 7180MTL—s—“‘CSCSC*C*C*C*C*C*C*C*C*C*C~C™C™CSCSCSCTKingstonCi‘‘;UC*
`180 Patent: Abstract, 2:1-6, 3:37-46, 3:56-4:4,
`
`Pre-Brief Conference Request; 6/11/2012 Response to Office 5:59-5:63, 6:2-7, 6:39-42.
`
`The Oxford American College Dictionary, 2001
`(definition of “optimize’”’)
`McAlexander Declaration from 337-ta-1034 J
`206-216.
`
`Action.
`
`Extrinsic
`
`Baker Declaration at 4941-59.
`
`The New Oxford American Dictionary, 2001
`(definition of “optimize’’).
`
`Dictionary of Computer Science, Engineering,
`and Technology, 2001 (definition of
`“optimizing”).
`
`The American Heritage Dictionary of the
`English Language, Fourth Edition, 2000
`(definition of “optimize’’).
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-00171-JLS-JDE Document 61-1 Filed 02/26/19 Page 10o0f10 PageID
`#:1319
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,063,850
`
`Claim Term 850 MTDKimgstom
`“[predefined] access
`See ’180 patent
`See ’180 patent
`profile(s)”
`
`19, 20, 21, 27, 28, 29, 30
`
`Claims 1, 2, 3, 9, 10, 11, 12,
`
`US.Pat. No. 9,367,486
`
`Claim Term 9,367,486 MTDCKingston
`“[predefined] access
`See ’180 patent
`See ’180 patent
`profile(s)”
`
`17, 21
`
`Claims 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16,
`
`