Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 1 of 58 PageID #: 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`Civil Action No. 2:16-cv-1116
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`LONE STAR SILICON INNOVATIONS LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
`MICRON SEMICONDUCTOR PRODUCTS,
`INC.,
`MICRON CONSUMER PRODUCTS GROUP,
`INC., and
`MICRON MEMORY JAPAN, INC.
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff, Lone Star Silicon Innovations LLC (“Lone Star”), complains against
`
`Defendants Micron Technology, Inc., Micron Semiconductor Products, Inc., Micron Consumer
`
`Products Group, Inc., and Micron Memory Japan, Inc. (individually or collectively “Defendants”
`
`or “Micron”) as follows:
`
`NATURE OF ACTION
`This is an action for patent infringement of United States Patent Nos. 5,872,038;
`
`1.
`
`5,912,188; 6,023,085; 6,097,061; 6,103,611; 6,326,231 and 6,388,330 (collectively, the “Patents
`
`in Suit”) under the Patent Laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1, et seq.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff Lone Star is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
`
`State of Texas with its principal place of business at 8105 Rasor Blvd., Suite 210, Plano, TX
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 2 of 58 PageID #: 2
`
`75024. Lone Star is in the business of licensing patented technology. Lone Star is the assignee of
`
`the Patents in Suit.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant Micron Technology, Inc. (“MTI”) is a corporation incorporated under
`
`the laws of Delaware with its principal place of business at 8000 South Federal Way, Boise,
`
`Idaho 83707. Micron and/or its subsidiaries also maintain offices in Allen, Texas 75031 and
`
`Round Rock, Texas 78681. Defendant MTI conducts business in and is doing business in Texas
`
`and in this District and elsewhere in the United States, including, without limitation, using,
`
`promoting, offering to sell, importing and/or selling memory devices and/or devices that
`
`incorporate memory devices that embody the patented technology, and enabling end-user
`
`purchasers to use such devices in this District.
`
`4.
`
`Defendant Micron Semiconductor Products, Inc. (“MSP”) is an Idaho corporation
`
`with a principal place of business at 3475 E. Commercial Ct., Meridian, Idaho 83642. MSP’s
`
`registered agent for service of process in the State of Texas is Corporation Service Company,
`
`211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, TX 78701-3218. On information and belief, MSP is a
`
`wholly-owned subsidiary of MTI. Defendant MSP conducts business in and is doing business in
`
`Texas and in this District and elsewhere in the United States, including, without limitation, using,
`
`promoting, offering to sell, importing and/or selling memory devices and/or devices that
`
`incorporate memory devices that embody the patented technology, and enabling end-user
`
`purchasers to use such devices in this District.
`
`5.
`
`Defendant Micron Consumer Products Group, Inc. (“MCPG”) is a Delaware
`
`corporation with its principal place of business at 47300 Bayside Parkway, Fremont, California
`
`94538. On information and belief, MCPG is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MTI. On information
`
`and belief, Defendant MCPG conducts business in and is doing business in Texas and in this
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 3 of 58 PageID #: 3
`
`District and elsewhere in the United States, including, without limitation, using, promoting,
`
`offering to sell, importing and/or selling memory devices and/or devices that incorporate
`
`memory devices that embody the patented technology, and enabling end-user purchasers to use
`
`such devices in this District.
`
`6.
`
`Defendant Micron Memory Japan, Inc. is a corporation with a principal place of
`
`business at Sumitomo Seimei Yaesu Bldg., 3F, 2-1 Yaesu 2-chome, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0028,
`
`Japan. On information and belief, Micron Memory Japan, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of
`
`Micron. Before it was acquired by Micron, Micron Memory Japan, Inc. was known as Elpida
`
`Memory, Inc. Micron Memory Japan, Inc., and Elpida Memory, Inc. are referred to collectively
`
`herein as “Micron Japan.” Micron Japan is the parent company of Micron Akita, Inc., with a
`
`principal place of business at 89-2, Yamada, Yuwaishida, Akita-shi, Akita 010-1222, Japan
`
`(“Micron Akita”). Micron Akita, Inc. supplies Micron Japan and MTI with memory devices
`
`and/or devices that incorporate memory devices that embody the patented technology. On
`
`information and belief, Micron Japan manufactures and sells memory devices and/or devices that
`
`incorporate memory devices that embody the patented technology and also sells such DRAM
`
`semiconductor devices manufactured by foundries such as Micron Taiwan, and Micron Akita.
`
`7.
`
`Upon information and belief, MTI controls and is the majority owner of the other
`
`Defendants, and Defendants are joint tortfeasors with one another with respect to the matters
`
`alleged herein.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`8.
`
`This action arises under the Patent Laws of the United States, Title 35 of the
`
`United States Code. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28
`
`U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 4 of 58 PageID #: 4
`
`9.
`
`On information and belief, Defendants are subject to this Court’s specific and
`
`general personal jurisdiction pursuant to due process and/or the Texas Long Arm Statute, due at
`
`least to their substantial business conducted in this forum, directly and/or through intermediaries,
`
`including (i) having solicited business in the State of Texas, transacted business within the State
`
`of Texas and attempted to derive financial benefit from residents of the State of Texas, including
`
`benefits directly related to the instant patent infringement causes of action set forth herein; (ii)
`
`having placed their products and services into the stream of commerce throughout the United
`
`States and having been actively engaged in transacting business in Texas and in this District; and
`
`(iii) either alone or in conjunction with others, having committed acts of infringement within
`
`Texas and in this District. On information and belief, Defendants, directly and/or through
`
`intermediaries, have advertised (including through websites), offered to sell, sold and/or
`
`distributed infringing products, and/or have induced the sale and use of infringing products in the
`
`United States and in Texas. Each Defendant has, directly or through its distribution network,
`
`purposefully and voluntarily placed such products in the stream of commerce knowing and
`
`expecting them to be purchased and used by consumers in Texas and in this District. Each
`
`Defendant has either committed direct infringement in Texas or committed indirect infringement
`
`based on acts of direct infringement in Texas. Further, on information and belief, Defendants are
`
`subject to the Court’s general jurisdiction, including from regularly doing or soliciting business,
`
`engaging in other persistent courses of conduct, and/or deriving substantial revenue from goods
`
`and services provided to individuals in Texas and in this District.
`
`10.
`
`On information and belief, Defendants do one or more of the following with
`
`memory devices and/or devices that incorporate memory devices that embody the patented
`
`technology that they or their foundries manufacture: (a) make these devices in the United States
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 5 of 58 PageID #: 5
`
`for sale to customers, including customers in Texas; (b) import these devices into the United
`
`States for sale to consumers, including consumers in Texas; (c) sell them or offer them for sale in
`
`the United States, including to customers in Texas; (d) sell them to customers who incorporate
`
`them into products that such customers import, sell or offer for sale in the United States,
`
`including in Texas.
`
`11.
`
`Venue lies in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b), 1391(c) and 1400(b)
`
`because each Defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District, resides in, has
`
`regularly conducted business in this District and/or has committed acts of patent infringement in
`
`this District. Without limitation, on information and belief, within this District Defendants,
`
`directly and/or through intermediaries, have advertised (including through websites), offered to
`
`sell, sold and/or distributed infringing products, and/or have induced the sale and use of
`
`infringing products.
`
`THE PATENTS IN SUIT
`
`12.
`
`On June 15, 1999, U.S. Patent No. 5,912,188 (“the ‘188 patent”), entitled
`
`“Method Of Forming A Contact Hole In An Interlevel Dielectric Layer Using Dual Etch Stops,”
`
`a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, was duly and legally issued. The ‘188 patent
`
`issued from U.S. patent application Serial Number 08/905,686 filed August 4, 1997 and
`
`discloses and relates to the design of and processes for fabricating semiconductor memory
`
`devices. The inventors assigned all right, title, and interest in the ‘188 patent to Advanced Micro
`
`Devices, Inc. (hereinafter “AMD”). AMD assigned its entire right, title, and interest in the ‘188
`
`patent to Lone Star, and Lone Star is the sole owner of all rights, title and interest in and to the
`
`‘188 patent including the right to sue for and collect past, present and future damages and to seek
`
`and obtain injunctive or any other relief for infringement of the ‘188 patent.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 6 of 58 PageID #: 6
`
`13.
`
`On February 8, 2000, U.S. Patent No. 6,023,085 (“the ‘085 patent”), entitled
`
`“Core Cell Structure And Corresponding Process For NAND-Type High Performance Flash
`
`Memory Device,” a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B, was duly and legally issued.
`
`The ‘085 patent issued from U.S. patent application Serial Number 08/993,910 filed December
`
`18, 1997 and discloses and relates to the design of and processes for fabricating NAND-type
`
`flash memory semiconductor devices. The inventors assigned all right, title, and interest in the
`
`‘085 patent to AMD. AMD assigned its entire right, title, and interest in the ‘085 patent to Lone
`
`Star, and Lone Star is the sole owner of all rights, title and interest in and to the ‘085 patent
`
`including the right to sue for and collect past, present and future damages and to seek and obtain
`
`injunctive or any other relief for infringement of the ‘085 patent.
`
`14.
`
`On February 16, 1999, U.S. Patent No. 5,872,038 (“the ‘038 patent”), entitled
`
`“Semiconductor Device Having an Elevated Active Region Formed in an Oxide Trench and
`
`Method of Manufacture Thereof,” a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C, was duly and
`
`legally issued. The ‘038 patent issued from U.S. patent application Serial Number 08/780,643,
`
`filed January 8, 1997 and discloses and relates to the design of and processes for fabricating
`
`semiconductor memory devices. The inventors assigned all right, title, and interest in the ‘038
`
`patent to AMD. AMD assigned its entire right, title, and interest in the ‘038 patent to Lone Star,
`
`and Lone Star is the sole owner of all rights, title and interest in and to the ‘038 patent including
`
`the right to sue for and collect past, present and future damages and to seek and obtain injunctive
`
`or any other relief for infringement of the ‘038 patent.
`
`15.
`
`On August 1, 2000, U.S. Patent No. 6,097,061 (“the ‘061 patent”), entitled
`
`“Trenched Gate Metal Oxide Semiconductor Device And Method,” a copy of which is attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit D, was duly and legally issued. The ‘061 patent issued from U.S. patent
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 7 of 58 PageID #: 7
`
`application Serial Number 09/052,051 filed December March 30, 1998 and discloses and relates
`
`to the design of and processes for fabricating semiconductor transistor devices. The inventors
`
`assigned all right, title, and interest in the ‘061 patent to AMD. AMD assigned its entire right,
`
`title, and interest in the ‘061 patent to Lone Star, and Lone Star is the sole owner of all rights,
`
`title and interest in and to the ‘061 patent including the right to sue for and collect past, present
`
`and future damages and to seek and obtain injunctive or any other relief for infringement of the
`
`‘061 patent.
`
`16.
`
`On August 15, 2000, U.S. Patent No. 6,103,611 (“the ‘611 patent”), entitled
`
`“Methods And Arrangements For Improved Spacer Formation Within A Semiconductor
`
`Device,” a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit E, was duly and legally issued. The ‘611
`
`patent issued from U.S. patent application Serial Number 08/993,830 filed December 18, 1997
`
`and discloses and relates to the design of and processes for fabricating semiconductor devices.
`
`The inventors assigned all right, title, and interest in the ‘611 patent to AMD. AMD assigned its
`
`entire right, title, and interest in the ‘611 patent to Lone Star, and Lone Star is the sole owner of
`
`all rights, title and interest in and to the ‘611 patent including the right to sue for and collect past,
`
`present and future damages and to seek and obtain injunctive or any other relief for infringement
`
`of the ‘611 patent.
`
`17.
`
`On December 4, 2001, U.S. Patent No. 6,326,231 (“the ‘231 patent”), entitled
`
`“Use Of Silicon Oxynitride Arc For Metal Layers,” a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit
`
`F, was duly and legally issued. The ‘231 patent issued from U.S. patent application Serial
`
`Number 09/207,562 filed December 8, 1998 and discloses and relates to the design of and
`
`processes for fabricating semiconductor devices. The inventors assigned all right, title, and
`
`interest in the ‘231 patent to AMD. AMD assigned its entire right, title, and interest in the ‘231
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 8 of 58 PageID #: 8
`
`patent to Lone Star, and Lone Star is the sole owner of all rights, title and interest in and to the
`
`‘231 patent including the right to sue for and collect past, present and future damages and to seek
`
`and obtain injunctive or any other relief for infringement of the ‘231 patent.
`
`18.
`
`On May 14, 2002, U.S. Patent No. 6,388,330 (“the ‘330 patent”), entitled “Low
`
`Dielectric Constant Etch Stop Layers In Integrated Circuit Interconnects,” a copy of which is
`
`attached hereto as Exhibit G, was duly and legally issued. The ‘330 patent issued from U.S.
`
`patent application Serial Number 09/776,012 filed February 1, 2001 and discloses and relates to
`
`the design of and processes for fabricating semiconductor devices. The inventors assigned all
`
`right, title, and interest in the ‘330 patent to AMD. AMD assigned its entire right, title, and
`
`interest in the ‘330 patent to Lone Star, and Lone Star is the sole owner of all rights, title and
`
`interest in and to the ‘330 patent including the right to sue for and collect past, present and future
`
`damages and to seek and obtain injunctive or any other relief for infringement of the ‘330 patent.
`
`DEFENDANTS’ INFRINGING PRODUCTS AND METHODS
`
`19.
`
`Defendants make, use, sell, offer for sale and/or import into the United States
`
`NAND and NOR Flash memory semiconductor devices and products incorporating such devices.
`
`These NAND and NOR Flash memory semiconductor devices are electrically re-writeable, non-
`
`volatile semiconductor memory devices that retain content when power is turned off.
`
`Defendants’ embedded NAND Flash-based storage devices are utilized in mobile phones,
`
`tablets, computers, industrial and automotive applications, networking and other personal and
`
`consumer applications. Defendants’ NAND Flash memory modules are also incorporated into
`
`removable storage devices, such as USB and Flash memory cards used with applications such as
`
`PCs, digital still cameras and mobile phones. Defendants also provide solid state drives (“SSDs”)
`
`incorporating their NAND Flash memory modules, which are components of notebooks,
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 9 of 58 PageID #: 9
`
`desktops, workstations and other consumer computing products, as well as servers and storage
`
`devices. Defendants also offer Multi-Chip Package (“MCP”) products, which incorporate their
`
`NAND and NOR Flash modules and technology. For example, Defendants’ e-MMC products
`
`combine NAND Flash with a logic controller that performs media management and Error Code
`
`Correction, and their e-MCP products combine e-MMC with LPDRAM on the same substrate.
`
`By way of example, and without limitation, Defendants sell such products under brand names
`
`that include Micron, IM Flash, Lexar, Crucial, SpecTek, Elpida and private labels, in packaged
`
`form, unpackaged form, die form and wafer form, and as solid state drives, memory modules,
`
`managed NAND, multi-chip packages, memory cards and USB devices. Despite not having a
`
`license to the ‘188 patent, Defendants have used the semiconductor fabrication methods claimed
`
`therein in making NAND and NOR Flash memory devices. Despite not having a license to the
`
`‘085 patent, Defendants Flash memory products adopt the designs claimed in the ‘085 patent.
`
`20.
`
`Defendants also make, use, sell, offer for sale and/or import into the United States
`
`DRAM memory semiconductor devices and products incorporating these devices. These
`
`products are high-density, random access memory devices that provide high-speed data storage
`
`and retrieval. Defendants’ DRAM memory devices are provided as wafers, chips, and memory
`
`modules and are integrated as components of desktop computer memories, mobile device
`
`memories, networking devices, servers, consumer electronics, communications equipment,
`
`computer peripherals, automotive systems and other applications. Defendants’ LPDRAM
`
`products offer lower power consumption relative to other DRAM products and are used in
`
`mobile phones, tablets, embedded applications, ultra-thin laptop computers and other mobile
`
`consumer devices that require low power consumption. By way of example, and without
`
`limitation, Defendants sell such DRAM products under brand names that include Micron, Lexar,
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 10 of 58 PageID #: 10
`
`Crucial, SpecTek, Elpida and private labels, in packaged form, unpackaged form, die form and
`
`wafer form, and as memory modules and multi-chip packages. Despite not having a license to
`
`the ‘611, ‘038 or ‘231 patents, Defendants have used the semiconductor fabrication methods
`
`claimed therein in making DRAM memory devices. Despite not having a license to the ‘330 or
`
`‘061 patents, Defendants DRAM memory products adopt the designs claimed in these patents.
`
`FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION – INFRINGEMENT OF THE ‘188 PATENT
`
`21.
`
`Plaintiff hereby repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 to
`
`20, as if fully set forth herein.
`
`22.
`
`Defendants MTI, MSP and MCPG, directly and/or through their subsidiaries,
`
`affiliates, agents, and/or business partners, have in the past and continue to directly infringe the
`
`‘188 patent, including at least claims 1-5, 7-13, 15-23 and 25-30, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(a)
`
`by making and using the methods claimed in the ‘188 patent in the manufacture of NAND Flash
`
`memory semiconductor devices within the United States, for example by practicing the steps of:
`
`(a) providing a semiconductor substrate; (b) forming a gate over the substrate; (c) forming a
`
`source/drain region in the substrate; (d) providing a source/drain contact electrically coupled to
`
`the source/drain region; (e) forming an interlevel dielectric layer that includes first, second and
`
`third dielectric layers over the source/drain contact; (f) forming an etch mask over the interlevel
`
`dielectric layer; (g) applying a first etch which is highly selective of the first dielectric layer with
`
`respect to the second dielectric layer through an opening in the etch mask using the second
`
`dielectric layer as an etch stop, to form a first hole in the first dielectric layer that extends to the
`
`second dielectric layer without extending to the third dielectric layer; (h) applying a second etch
`
`which is highly selective of the second dielectric layer with respect to the third dielectric layer
`
`through the opening in the etch mask using the third dielectric layer as an etch stop, to form a
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 11 of 58 PageID #: 11
`
`second hole in the second dielectric layer that extends to the third dielectric layer without
`
`extending to the source/drain contact; and (i) applying a third etch which is highly selective of
`
`the third dielectric layer with respect to the source/drain contact through the opening in the etch
`
`mask, form a third hole in the third dielectric layer that extends to the source/drain contact, such
`
`that the first, second and third holes in combination provide a contact hole in the interlevel
`
`dielectric layer.
`
`23.
`
`Defendants directly and/or through their subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, and/or
`
`business partners, have also in the past and continue to directly infringe the ‘188 patent,
`
`including at least claims 1-5, 7-13, 15-23 and 25-30, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(g) by
`
`importing, using, selling or offering to sell NAND Flash memory semiconductor devices in the
`
`United States made using the methods claimed in the ‘188 patent. NAND Flash memory
`
`semiconductor devices manufactured by Defendants and/or other entities owned and controlled
`
`by Defendants or by third-party partner foundries under contract with Defendants, are made
`
`using a process that practices the claims of the ‘188 patent. Defendants directly infringe when
`
`they import, use, sell or offer for sale in the United States NAND Flash memory semiconductor
`
`devices made using the claimed methods.
`
`24.
`
`Defendants have been and are engaged in one or more of these direct infringing
`
`activities related to their NAND Flash memory semiconductor devices, including at least their
`
`NAND Flash Products, including SLC NAND, MLC NAND, TLC NAND and Serial NAND
`
`products, whether sold in packaged form, unpackaged form, die form or wafer form; managed
`
`NAND Flash Products incorporating such NAND flash products, such as their e-MMC and
`
`Embedded USB products; multichip packages incorporating such NAND Flash Products, such as
`
`their e.MMC-Based MCP and NAND-Based MCP products; solid state drives incorporating such
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 12 of 58 PageID #: 12
`
`NAND Flash Products, such as their 9100 PCIe® NVMe™ SSD, S600DC, M600, M500DC, and
`
`M510DC solid state drives; and any other NAND Flash memory devices made by a substantially
`
`similar process (“‘188 Accused NAND Flash Products”).
`
`25.
`
`Defendants, directly and/or through their subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, and/or
`
`business partners, have been and are now indirectly infringing the ‘188 patent, including at least
`
`claims 1-5, 7-13, 15-23 and 25-30, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by actively inducing acts of
`
`direct infringement performed by others. Defendants have actual notice of the ‘188 patent and
`
`the infringement alleged herein at least upon the service of this Complaint. Upon information
`
`and belief, MTI has numerous lawyers and other active agents of MTI and of its owned and
`
`controlled subsidiaries who regularly review patents and published patent applications relevant
`
`to technology in the fields of the Patents in Suit, specifically including patents directed to
`
`semiconductor memory devices issued to competitors such as AMD, the original assignee of the
`
`‘188 patent. Upon information and belief, MTI itself has been issued over 24,000 patents,
`
`including over 900 patents prosecuted in the USPTO in the same classifications as the ‘188
`
`patent, giving Defendants intimate knowledge of the art in fields relevant to this civil action. The
`
`timing, circumstances and extent of MTI and its subsidiaries MSP, MCPG and Micron Japan
`
`obtaining actual knowledge of the ‘188 patent prior to the commencement of this lawsuit will be
`
`confirmed during discovery.
`
`26.
`
`Upon gaining knowledge of the ‘188 patent, it was, or became, apparent to
`
`Defendants that the manufacture, sale, importing, offer for sale, and use of their ‘188 Accused
`
`NAND Flash Products results in infringement of the ‘188 patent. Upon information and belief,
`
`Defendants have continued and will continue to engage in activities constituting inducement of
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 13 of 58 PageID #: 13
`
`infringement, notwithstanding their knowledge, or willful blindness thereto, that the activities
`
`they induce result in infringement of the ‘188 patent.
`
`27.
`
`The ‘188 Accused NAND Flash Products are intended for integration into
`
`products known to be sold widely in the United States. MTI and its subsidiaries make NAND
`
`Flash semiconductor devices using methods claimed in the ‘188 patent, which devices infringe
`
`when they are imported into, or sold, used, or offered for sale in, the United States. Defendants
`
`indirectly infringe by inducing customers (such as makers of mobile devices, desktop computers
`
`and other devices that use NAND Flash memory) to import products that integrate NAND Flash
`
`semiconductor devices made using the methods claimed in the ‘188 patent, or to sell or use such
`
`products, or offer them for sale, in the United States. For example, Defendants induce third-party
`
`manufacturers, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), importers, resellers, and other
`
`customers who purchase devices manufactured at Micron Japan’s and other overseas facilities of
`
`MTI’s owned and controlled subsidiaries, or supplied under agreements with partner foundries,
`
`to import devices made using the methods claimed in the ‘188 patent, or to sell or use such
`
`devices, or offer them for sale in the United States without authority.
`
`28.
`
`Defendants encourage customers, resellers, OEMs, or others to import into the
`
`United States and sell and use in the United States the ‘188 Accused NAND Flash Products
`
`made using the methods claimed in the ‘188 patent with knowledge and the specific intent to
`
`cause the acts of direct infringement performed by these third parties. On information and belief,
`
`after Defendants obtained knowledge of the ‘188 patent, the ‘188 Accused NAND Flash
`
`Products have been and will continue to be imported into the United States and sold in large
`
`volumes by themselves and by others, such as customers, distributors and resellers. Defendants
`
`are aware that the ‘188 Accused NAND Flash Products are always made using the same
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 14 of 58 PageID #: 14
`
`fabrication methods under Defendants’ direction and control such that Defendants’ customers
`
`will infringe one or more claims of the ‘188 patent by incorporating such NAND Flash
`
`semiconductor devices in other products, and that subsequent importation, sale and use of such
`
`products in the United States would be a direct infringement of the ‘188 patent. Therefore,
`
`Defendants are aware that their customers will infringe the ‘188 patent by importing, selling and
`
`using the products supplied by Defendants.
`
`29.
`
`Defendants directly benefit from and actively and knowingly encourage
`
`customers, resellers, and users’ importation of these products into the United States and sale and
`
`use within the United States. Defendants actively encourage customers and downstream users,
`
`OEMs, and resellers to import, use, and sell in the United States the ‘188 Accused NAND Flash
`
`Products that they manufacture and supply, including through advertising, marketing and sales
`
`activities directed at United States sales. On information and belief, MTI and its subsidiaries are
`
`aware of the size and importance of the United States market for customers of Defendants’
`
`products, and also distribute or supply these products intended for importation, use, and sale in
`
`the United States. Defendants routinely market their infringing NAND Flash memory products to
`
`third parties for inclusion in products that are sold to customers in the United States, as well as
`
`directly to end user customers. MTI has publicly stated that its Flash products are primarily
`
`targeted for mobile phones, SSDs, tablets, computers, industrial and automotive applications,
`
`removable storage devices, SSDs and MCP products, all of which are widely sold and used in the
`
`United States. Defendants have numerous direct sales, distributors and reseller outlets for these
`
`products in the United States. Defendants’ marketing efforts show that they have specifically
`
`intended to and have induced direct infringement in the United States.
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 15 of 58 PageID #: 15
`
`30.
`
`Defendants also provide OEMs, manufacturers, importers, resellers, customers,
`
`and end users instructions, user guides and technical specifications on how to incorporate the
`
`‘188 Accused NAND Flash Products into electronics products that are made, used, sold, offered
`
`for sale in and/or imported into the United States. When OEMs, manufacturers, importers,
`
`resellers, customers, and end users follow such instructions, user guides, and technical
`
`specifications and embed the products in end products and make, use, offer to sell, sell, or import
`
`them into the United States, they directly infringe one or more claims of the ‘188 patent.
`
`Defendants know that by providing such instructions, user guides, and technical specifications,
`
`OEMs, manufacturers, importers, resellers, customers, and end users follow them, and therefore
`
`directly infringe one or more claims of the ‘188 patent. Defendants thus know that their actions
`
`actively induce infringement.
`
`31.
`
`Defendants have engaged and will continue to engage in additional activities to
`
`specifically target the United States market for the ‘188 Accused NAND Flash products and
`
`actively induce OEMs, manufacturers, importers, resellers, customers, and end users to directly
`
`infringe one or more claims of the ‘188 patent in the United States. For example, Defendants
`
`have showcased their NAND Flash memory technologies at various industry events and through
`
`written materials distributed in the United States, in an effort to encourage various OEMs,
`
`manufacturers, importers, resellers, customers, and end users to include the infringing
`
`technology in their computers, mobile devices, removable storage devices and other products.
`
`These events are attended by the direct infringers mentioned above and generally by companies
`
`that make, use, offer to sell, sell, or import in the United States products that use NAND Flash
`
`memory components such as those made by Defendants.
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-01116-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 10/07/16 Page 16 of 58 PageID #: 16
`
`32.
`
`Defendants derive significant revenue by selling their NAND Flash memory
`
`products to third parties who directly infringe the ‘188 patent in the United States. Further, MTI
`
`has stated publicly that it has partnered with Intel for design, development, and manufacture of
`
`NAND Flash semiconductor devices and sells its NAND Flash products to Intel through its
`
`partnership with Intel. Defendants know that by selling NAND Flash to Intel, Intel will
`
`incorporate the NAND Flash and directly infringe one or more claims of the ‘188 patents.
`
`Defendants thus know that these actions actively induce infringement.
`
`33.
`
`Defendants’ extensive sales and marketing efforts, sales volume, and partnerships
`
`all evidence their intent to induce companies to infringe one or more claims of the’188 patent by,
`
`using, offering to sell, selling, or importing products that incorporate the ‘188 Accused NAND
`
`Flash Products in the United States. Defendants have had specific intent to induce infringement
`
`or have been willfully blind to the direct infringement they are inducing.
`
`34.
`
`Defendants’ direct and indirect infringement of the ‘188 patent has injured Lone
`
`Star, and Lone Star is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for such infringement
`
`pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284. Unless they cease their infringing activities, Defendant