The present disclosure relates to memory devices and memory modules. More specifically, the present disclosure relates to a memory package having stacked array dies and methods for reducing driver load in the memory package.
Memory modules may include a number of memory packages. Each memory package may itself include a number of array dies that are packaged together. Each array die may include an individual semiconductor chip that includes a number of memory cells. The memory cell may serve as the basic building block of computer storage representing a single bit of data.
In some cases, the control die 130 may include memory cells and therefore, also serve as an array die. Thus, as can be seen from
Generally, a load exists on each of the drivers 134, 140, 184, and 186 by virtue of the drivers being in electrical communication with the corresponding die interconnects and the corresponding circuitry of the array dies. Thus, to drive a signal along a die interconnect, a driver typically must be large enough to overcome the load on the driver. However, generally a larger driver not only consumes more space on the control die, but also consumes more power.
In certain embodiments, an apparatus is provided that comprises a DRAM package operable to communicate with a system memory controller via a command/address bus and a data bus. The DRAM package comprises stacked array dies including at least a first array die and a second array die stacked over at least the first array die, and terminals including control terminals, via which the DRAM package receives command/address signals, and data terminals, via which the DRAM package receives or outputs data signals. The DRAM package further comprises control interconnects between respective ones of the control terminals and one or more array dies in the stacked array dies, first data interconnects between respective ones of the data terminals and the first array die, and second data interconnects distinct from the first data interconnects and between respective ones of the data terminals and the second array die. The DRAM package further comprises drivers coupled to the data terminals and configured to drive first data signals to the first array die via the first data interconnects and second data signals to the second array die via the second data interconnects, a respective signal of the first data signals being driven by one or more drivers having a first driver size, a respective signal of the second data signals being driven by one or more drivers having a second driver size different from the first driver size.
In certain embodiments, a method is provided for optimizing load in a memory package. The DRAM package comprises stacked array dies including at least a first array die and a second array die stacked over at least the first array die, and terminals including control terminals, via which the DRAM package receives command/address signals, and data terminals, via which the DRAM package receives or outputs data signals. The DRAM package further comprises control interconnects between respective ones of the control terminals and one or more array dies in the stacked array dies, first data interconnects between respective ones of the data terminals and the first array die, and second data interconnects distinct from the first data interconnects and between respective ones of the data terminals and the second array die. The method comprises selecting a first driver size to drive a first signal received at one of the data terminals to the first array die via one of the first data interconnects and selecting a second driver size to drive a second signal received at the one of the data terminals to the second array die via one of the second data interconnects. The second driver size is different from the first driver size.
In some embodiments, a respective one of the first data interconnects has a first load and a respective one of the second data interconnect has a second load larger than the first load. The second driver size is larger than the first driver size.
Throughout the drawings, reference numbers are re-used to indicate correspondence between referenced elements. The drawings are provided to illustrate certain example embodiments of the inventive subject matter described herein and not to limit the scope thereof.
In addition to the below, the following U.S. patents are incorporated in their entirety by reference herein: U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,289,386, 7,286,436, 7,442,050, 7,375,970, 7,254,036, 7,532,537, 7,636,274, 7,630,202, 7,619,893, 7,619,912, 7,811,097. Further, the following U.S. patent applications are incorporated in their entirety by reference herein: U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 12/422,912, 12/422,853, 12/577,682, 12/629,827, 12/606,136, 12/874,900, 12/422,925, 12/504,131, 12/761,179, and 12/815,339.
Certain embodiments of the present disclosure reduce the size of drivers that are configured to drive a signal, such as a data signal, along a die interconnect to one or more array dies. Further, certain embodiments of the present disclosure reduce the power consumption of the drivers.
In certain embodiments, reducing one or both of driver size and driver power consumption may be accomplished by increasing the number of die interconnects and reducing the number of array dies that are in electrical communication with each die interconnect. For example, instead of one die interconnect in electrical communication with four array dies, there may be two die interconnects, each in electrical communication with a different pair of the four array dies.
In certain embodiments, determining the number of die interconnects and the number of array dies in electrical communication with each die interconnect is based, at least in part, on a load of each array die and a load of the die interconnect that is in electrical communication with one or more of the array dies.
In some embodiments, the load contribution from a die interconnect may be negligible compared to the load contribution from the array dies. In such embodiments, determining the number of die interconnects and the number of array dies in electrical communication with each die interconnect may be based, at least in part, on a load of each array die without considering the load of the die interconnect. However, as the physical size of a memory package shrinks, the load of a die interconnect becomes a non-negligible value relative to the load of the array dies. Thus, as memory packages become physically smaller, it becomes more important to consider the load of the die interconnect in determining the number of die interconnects and the number of array dies in electrical communication with each die interconnect. Advantageously, certain embodiments of the present disclosure account for both the loads of the array dies and the loads of the die interconnects on a conduit (e.g., driver) in determining the number of die interconnects to be used and the number of array dies in electrical communication with each die interconnect.
The memory package 200 may include a plurality of array dies 210 (e.g., array dies 210a-210d). The plurality of array dies 210 may be sealed within the memory package 200. Further, circuitry of the array dies 210 may be in electrical communication with the input/output terminals of the memory package 200. Although generally referred to as array dies herein, the array dies 210 may also be called slave dies or slave chips. Each of the array dies 210a-210d may include circuitry (e.g., memory cells) (not shown) for storing data. Examples of array dies compatible with certain embodiments described herein are described by the existing literature regarding the Hybrid Memory Cube (e.g., as cited above). As illustrated in
Each of the array dies 210 may include one or more data ports (not shown). The data ports enable electrical communication and data transfer between the corresponding memory circuitry of the array dies 210 and a communication pathway (e.g., a die interconnect).
In the example schematically illustrated in
For example, die interconnect 220a may be in electrical communication with a data port from array die 210a and a data port from array die 210b (as illustrated by the darkened circles in
However, continuing this example, the die interconnect 220b may be in electrical communication with a data port from array die 210c and a data port from array die 210d (as illustrated by the darkened circles in
In addition to the plurality of array dies 210, the memory package 200 includes a control die 230, which may also be called a master die. Examples of master dies compatible with certain embodiments described herein are described by the existing literature regarding the Hybrid Memory Cube (e.g., as cited above). In some embodiments, the control die 230 may be one of the array dies 210. Alternatively, the control die 230 may be a modified version of one of the array dies 210. Thus, in some implementations, memory package 200 may include four dies or chips instead of the five illustrated in
The control die 230 may include a number of data conduits 232, which includes data conduits 232a and 232b. Each of these data conduits 232 may be configured to transmit a data signal to a single die interconnect 220. For example, the data conduit 232a may be configured to transmit a data signal to the die interconnect 220a without transmitting the data signal to the die interconnect 220b. Conversely, the data conduit 232b may be configured to transmit the data signal to the die interconnect 220b without transmitting the data signal to the die interconnect 220a (e.g., data conduit 232b is electrically isolated from die interconnect 220a and data conduit 232a is electrically isolated from die interconnect 220b).
In some embodiments, the data conduits 232 may also include one or more drivers 234 as schematically illustrated by
Each of the data conduits 232 may be configured to receive the data signal from a common source. For instance, the data conduit 232a and the data conduit 232b may each receive a substantially similar, if not identical, data signal from the same signal source (e.g. the data signal corresponding to the same data bit). The source of the data signal may include a data path, a driver, a latch, a pin, or any other construct that may provide a data signal to a data conduit.
The data conduits 232 may each be subject to a load. Although not limited as such, this load may be measured as a capacitive load, such as a parasitic capacitance. The load on each of the data conduits 232 may include at least a load of the die interconnect 220 to which the data conduit 232 is coupled or connected as well as a load of each array die 210 with which the die interconnect 220 is in electrical communication via a data port of the die interconnect 220. Thus, for example, the load of the data conduit 232a may include loads of the die interconnect 220a, the array die 210a, and the array die 210b. Similarly, the load of the data conduit 232b may include loads of the die interconnect 220b, the array die 210c, and the array die 210d.
Generally, a load that would be on a data conduit that was in electrical communication with a die interconnect that was in electrical communication with at least one data port of each of the array dies 210 can be considered the maximum load for a data conduit. This maximum load is the load of a data conduit of a memory package that does not implement the teachings of this disclosure, but is in accordance with conventional configurations.
In some implementations, the difference between the load of the data conduit 232a and the load of the data conduit 232b is less than the maximum load for a data conduit as described above. Thus, in some cases, there may exist a degree of balance or equalization between the loads of the data conduits 232a, 232b. In some implementations, the difference between the load of the data conduit 232a and the load of the data conduit 232b is zero or substantially zero. In some embodiments, the length of each die interconnect 220, and the number of array dies 210 in electrical communication with each die interconnect 220 may be selected to maintain the difference between the load of the data conduit 232a and the load of the data conduit 232b to be at or below a threshold load difference. For example, suppose that the load of each array die 210 is 1, the load of each segment of the die interconnects 220 is 0.25, and that the threshold load difference is 0.5. Using the configuration schematically illustrated in
For certain embodiments, the load of each data conduit is less than the maximum load as described above. Thus, in some cases, the load of the data conduit 232a is less than the maximum load and the load of the data conduit 232b is less than the maximum load. Further, in many implementations, the combined load of the data conduit 232a and the data conduit 232b is less than the maximum load of a single data conduit. In other words, it is possible to design the data conduit 232a and the data conduit 232b to reduce the overall load compared to a single data conduit that is in electrical communication with a die interconnect that is in electrical communication with at least one data port of each of the array dies 210. By reducing the overall load compared to the single data conduit, it is possible in many cases to reduce power consumption. Further, it is possible in many cases to maintain signal quality (e.g. maintain signal amplitude, maintain low signal distortion, etc.) while reducing power consumption. Advantageously, in a number of embodiments, by using multiple data conduits instead of a single data conduit, the speed of the memory package 200 can be increased. In some cases, this speed increase can include a reduced latency in accessing array dies 210 and/or operating the memory package 200 at a higher clock frequency.
Each of the die interconnects 220 may include any type of conducting material. For example, the die interconnects 220 may include copper, gold, or a conductive alloy, such as a copper/silver alloy. Further, the die interconnects 220 may include any type of structure for enabling electrical communication between the data conduits 232 and the data ports of the array dies 210. For example, the die interconnects 220 may include a wire, a conducting rod, or a conducting trace, to name a few. Moreover, the die interconnects 220 may use vias, or through-silicon vias (TSVs) to couple with or to electrically communicate with an array die. For instance, die interconnect 220a may be connected with data ports of the array dies 210a and 210b using vias (illustrated by the filled or darkened circles). Examples of TSVs which may be used with the present disclosure are described further in U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,633,165 and 7,683,459.
In addition, the die interconnects 220 may use via holes to pass through an array die that is not configured to be in electrical communication with the die interconnect. For instance, die interconnect 220b may pass through array dies 210a and 210b using TSVs that do not enable electrical communication between the die interconnect 220b and data ports of the array dies 210a and 210b (illustrated by the unfilled circles). In this way, the array dies 210a, 210b are not responsive to the data signals being transmitted by the die interconnect 220b. However, the die interconnect 220b may be connected with at least one data port of each of the array dies 210c and 210d using a via (illustrated by the filled or darkened circles). In cases where the die interconnect passes through an array die that is not configured to be in electrical communication with the die interconnect, the TSV may include an insulator or an air gap between the die interconnect and the array die circuitry that is large enough to prevent electrical communication between the die interconnect and the array die circuitry. In certain embodiments, the TSV for array dies that are configured to be in electrical communication with the die interconnect and for array dies that are not configured to be in electrical communication with the die interconnect may be configured the same. However, in such cases, electrical connections leading from the TSV of the array dies that are not configured to be in electrical communication with the die interconnect may not exist or may be stubs. These stubs are not configured to provide electrical communication with the memory cells of the array die.
Although
In certain embodiments, the same die interconnects and the same corresponding data conduits may be used to transfer data both to and from the array dies 210. In such embodiments, the die interconnects may be bi-directional. In alternative embodiments, separate die interconnects and corresponding data conduits may be used to transfer data to the array dies 210 and data from the array dies 210 to the control die 230. Thus, such embodiments may include double the number of die interconnects and data conduits as embodiments that use the same die interconnect to transfer data to and from an array die.
In some embodiments, the control die 230 may include additional command/address conduits 240 and die interconnects 242, which may be in electrical communication with at least one port of each of the array dies 210. For simplicity,
In addition, in certain embodiments, the control die 230 may include a plurality of chip select conduits 250 (e.g., chip select conduits 250a-250d as shown in
In some embodiments, the control die 230 may include additional drivers that are configured to drive the chip select signals along the die interconnects 252. Alternatively, the chip select signals may be driven by drivers that are external to the control die 230. For example, a register (not shown) that is part of a memory module that includes the memory package 200 may determine the chip select signals and drive the chip select signals to the array dies 210. As a second example, the chip select signals may be provided by an MCH. In some embodiments, the control die 230 may determine the array die 210 to select based on, for example, an address signal. In such embodiments, the control die may generate the chip select signals.
The memory package 300 may include a plurality of array dies 310 (e.g., array dies 310a-310h). In the implementation illustrated in
In addition to the plurality of array dies 310, the memory package 300 includes a control die 330. In some embodiments, the control die 330 may include a number of conduits 332 (e.g., conduits 332a-332f). Each of these conduits 332 may be configured to transmit a signal to a single die interconnect 320.
Further, implementations of the conduits 332 may include one or more drivers 334 (e.g., drivers 334a-334f). Each of the drivers 334 may be configured to drive a signal along a corresponding die interconnect 320. For instance, the driver 334a of the conduit 332a may be configured to drive a signal along the die interconnect 320a to one or more of the array dies 310a and 310b. As a second example, the driver 334b of the conduit 332b may be configured to drive a signal along the die interconnect 320b to one or more of the array dies 310c and 310d. Although the die interconnect 320b may pass through the array dies 310a and 310b, because the die interconnect 320b, in the example illustrated in
In some embodiments, the signal can be a data signal, a command or address signal, a chip select signal, a supply voltage signal, or a ground voltage signal, to name a few. Further, as the signal is not limited to a data signal, in some embodiments, the conduits 332 may include conduits configured to provide signals other than data signals to the die interconnects 320. For example, the conduits may include conduits configured to provide a command or address signal, a chip select signal, a supply voltage signal, or a ground voltage signal to one or more die interconnects. Consequently, in some embodiments, the drivers 334 may be configured to drive signals other than data signals.
Generally, the signal that each of the drivers 334 drive to the corresponding die interconnects 320 is from a common source. Thus, each of the drivers 334, in certain embodiments, is driving the same signal to each corresponding die interconnect 320.
The size of the drivers 334 is generally related to the load on the driver 334. In certain embodiments, the load on each driver 334 corresponds to the load of the respective conduit 332. Although not limited as such, the load may be measured as a capacitive load, such as a parasitic capacitance.
The load on each of the conduits 332 may include at least the loads of the die interconnect 320 with which the conduit 332 is coupled or connected as well as the loads of each array die 310 with which the die interconnect 320 is in electrical communication via a port of the die interconnect 320. Thus, for example, the loads of the conduit 332a may include the loads of the die interconnect 320a, the array die 310a, and the array die 310b. Similarly, the loads of the conduit 332b may include the loads of the die interconnect 320b, the array die 310c, and the array die 310d. The loads of both conduits 332a and 332b include a load of two array dies 310 because the corresponding die interconnects 320 are each configured to be in electrical communication with two array dies 310. On the other hand, the load of the conduit 332c, which may include the loads of the die interconnect 320c and the array die 310e, includes a load of one array die 310e because the corresponding die interconnect 320c is configured to be in electrical communication with only one array die 310.
As previously described with respect to
In some implementations, the difference between the loads of any pair of the conduits 332 is less than the maximum load for a conduit as described above. For instance, the difference between the load of the conduit 332a and the load of the conduit 332b is less than the maximum load. As a second example, the difference between the load of the conduit 334f and any one of the conduits 334a to 334e is less than the maximum load. Thus, in some cases, the load on each of the conduits 332 may be, at least partially balanced or equalized to reduce or minimize the difference between the load of any pair of the conduits 332. In some implementations, the difference between the load of a pair of the conduits 332 is zero or substantially zero. In some embodiments, the length of each die interconnect 320, and the number of array dies 310 in electrical communication with each die interconnect 320 may be selected to maintain the difference between the load of any pair of the conduits 332 to be at or below a threshold load difference.
For certain embodiments, the load of each conduit is less than the maximum load as described above. Thus, for example, the load of the conduit 332a, the load of the conduit 332b, and the load of the conduit 332c are each less than the maximum load defined above.
In certain embodiments, the load associated with each of the array dies 310 may be substantially equivalent. For example, the load of the array die 310a may be substantially equal to the load of the array die 310h. Thus, the load contribution from the array dies 310 for a specific conduit 332 may be measured as a multiple of the array dies that are in electrical communication with a die interconnect 320 corresponding to a specific conduit 332. For example, assuming that the load of each of the array dies 310 is then the contribution of the load from the array dies 310 to the conduit 332a would be 2L because the die interconnect 320a corresponding to the conduit 332a is in electrical communication with two array dies 310, array dies 310a and 310b. In alternative embodiments, the load of each of the array dies 310a may differ. For example, the load of array die 310a may be L and the load of the array die 310b may be 1.25L.
Similar to the array dies 310, in some embodiments, a die interconnect 320 can be considered to comprise a plurality of segments, with each segment of a die interconnect 320 contributing a substantially equivalent load to the load of the die interconnect 320. In this case, the segment of the die interconnect 320 may refer to the portion of the die interconnect between two successive or adjacent dies (array die-to-array die, master die-to-array die, or both) along the die interconnect 320. Further, the segment may be defined as a portion of the die interconnect 320 between the dies exclusive of a portion of the dies. For example, one segment of the die interconnect 320a may extend from the top of the array die 310a to the bottom of the array die 310b. Alternatively, the segment may be defined to include at least a portion of at least one of the array dies 310. For example, one segment of the die interconnect 320a may extend from the center of array die 310a to the center of array die 310b. As a second example, one segment of the die interconnect 320a may extend from the top of the control die 330 to the top of the array die 310a, and therefore may include a portion of the die interconnect 320a extending from the bottom of the array die 310a to the top of the array die 310a. In some implementations, the segments are substantially equal in length to each other. Moreover, the load contribution of each segment may be substantially equal to each other. Alternatively, the segments may be unequal in length and/or may each contribute a different load to the total load of a die interconnect 320. Further, in some cases, the load contribution of a segment of the die interconnect 320 that is in electrical communication with a port of an array die 310 may differ from the load contribution of a segment of the die interconnect 320 that is not in electrical communication with a port of an array die 310.
In some cases, the load contribution of each segment of the die interconnect 320 may be measured as a fraction of the load contribution from an array die 310. For example, the load of one segment of the die interconnect 320a may be equivalent to one quarter of the load of an array die 310. Thus, for example, the load of the conduit 332a may be 2.5L assuming a load contribution of L per array die 310 (two in this case) in electrical communication with the die interconnect 320a and a load contribution of 0.25L per segment (two in this case) of the die interconnect 320a. As a second example, the load of the conduit 332f may be 3L assuming the same load values as the previous example and a load contribution from one array die 310h and eight die interconnect 320f segments. Table 1 specifies the capacitive load values for each conduit 332 assuming, as with the previous two examples, that the load of each of the array dies 310 is L, and that the load of each segment of the die interconnects 320 is 0.25L. Table 1 also specifies the deviation in load from the conduits having the highest load value, which in this example are conduits 332b and 332f.
As can be seen from Table 1, the maximum load of any conduit 332, using the example values previously described, is 3L, or rather three times the load of a single array die 310. Assuming the same example values, the load of a conduit in electrical communication with a die interconnect that itself is in electrical communication with each array die 310 would be 10L. Thus, certain embodiments of the present disclosure enable a reduction in the load of the conduits 332. Consequently, in some embodiments, the drivers 334 may each be smaller than a single driver that is configured to drive a signal from a conduit along a single die interconnect that is in electrical communication with a port from each of the array dies 310. Moreover, the drivers 334 may include smaller transistor sizes than a single driver that is configured to drive a signal to each of the array dies 110.
As can be seen from Table 1, conduits 332b and 332f have the largest capacitive load of the group of conduits, which is 3L. Conduit 332 has the smallest capacitive load of the group of conduits, which is 2.25L and which is a deviation of only 0.75 from the maximum load. Thus, in some embodiments, each of the drivers 334 may be substantially similar in size. In certain implementations, the drivers 334 may vary in size based on the total capacitive load on each conduit 332. Thus, the driver 334f may be larger than the driver 334e. Alternatively, each driver 334 may be substantially equal and may be configured based on the drivers 334 with the largest load, which are drivers 334b and 334f in the example illustrated in
In some embodiments, the capacitive load of each conduit 332 or driver 334 can be calculated using formula (1).
CL=AD+S/M (1)
In formula (1), CL represents the capacitive load of a conduit 332 or driver 334, AD represents the number of array dies 310 in electrical communication with a die interconnect 320 that is in electrical communication with the conduit 332 and/or driver 334, S represents the number of die interconnect segments of the die interconnect 320, and M represents the ratio of the load of an array die 310 to the load of a segment of a die interconnect 320. Thus, using formula (1) and the example values described above, the load of the driver 332a, for example, can be calculated with the following values: AD=2, for two array dies 310; S=2, for the two segments of the die interconnect 320a; and M=4, for the ratio of the load of an array die 310, L, to the load of a segment of the die interconnect 320a, 0.25L. Therefore, as can be seen from Table 1, the capacitive load of the driver 332a is 2.5L where L is the load of a single array die.
In some cases, the load on each conduit 332 and/or driver 334 may be evenly balanced. In other words, the load on each conduit 332 and/or driver 334 may be substantially the same. To achieve a balanced load, each of the conduits 332 may be in electrical communication with a combination of array dies 310 and die interconnect 320 segments that results in a load that is substantially equivalent to the loads of the other conduits 332. In certain embodiments, the load of the conduits 332 is balanced despite each conduit 332 being in electrical communication with a different subset of the array dies 310. However, in alternative embodiments, the load of each conduit 332 and/or driver 334 may differ. This difference in the load of the conduits 332 and/or drivers 334 may be a design decision (e.g. to maintain a specific number of drivers). Alternatively, or in addition, the load difference between conduits 332 and/or drivers 334 may occur because the loads of the array dies 310 and the die interconnect segments 320 do not allow for perfect or substantially even load balancing.
As previously stated, in some embodiments the loads of the conduits 332 and/or drivers 334 may be balanced to minimize the difference between any pair of conduits 332 and/or drivers 334. For example, as illustrated in
Alternatively, or in addition, the loads of the conduits 332 and/or drivers 334 may be balanced to reduce the maximum load of each conduit 332 and/or driver 334. Further, in some embodiments, the maximum load of each conduit 332 and/or driver 334 may be reduced to maintain the load of each conduit 332 and/or driver 334 to be at or below a threshold load difference.
Although not illustrated in
In addition to the drivers 334 of the control die 330, the memory package 300 may include one or more pre-drivers 340. A pre-driver 340, shown schematically in
Just as the memory package 300 may include a pre-driver 340 for providing a signal to the conduits 332, the memory package 300 may include a post-driver (not shown) for driving an output signal from the control die 330. This post-driver may drive the output signal to additional latches and/or drivers. In some embodiments, the post-driver may drive the signal from the memory package 300 to a bus or other electrical path that is in electrical communication with the memory package 300.
The driver structure 400 can include an input/output port 402 configured to receive or send a signal, such as a data signal. Signals received at the input/output port 402 can be provided to the drivers 404a and 404b. In turn, these drivers 404a and 404b can drive the signal to conduits 406a and 406b respectively, which are in electrical communication with corresponding die interconnects. Each of the die interconnects may be in electrical communication with different array dies in accordance with certain embodiments described herein.
In some embodiments, the driver structure 400 is bi-directional. In such embodiments, operation of the drivers 404a and 404b, and 408a and 408b may be controlled or enabled by a control signal (e.g., a directional control signal). This control signal, in some cases, may correspond to one or more of a command/address signal (e.g., read/write) and a chip select signal. In some implementations, the drivers 404a and 404b may drive a signal to the array die corresponding to the chip select signal, and not to array dies that do not correspond to a chip select signal. For example, suppose the conduit 406a is in electrical communication with array dies one and two (not shown), and that the conduit 406b is in electrical communication with array dies three and four (not shown). If a chip select signal is received corresponding to array die two, then in some implementations, driver 404a may be configured to drive a signal along a die interconnect in electrical communication with the conduit 406a to array die one and two. In this example, the driver 404b would not drive the signal because the chip select signal does not correspond to either array die three or array die four.
In some embodiments, the drivers 404a and 404b may drive a signal to all of the array dies. For example, assume the memory package that includes the driver structure 400 also includes four array dies. If the die interconnect in electrical communication with the conduit 406a is in electrical communication with two of the array dies, and if the die interconnect in electrical communication with the conduit 406b is in electrical communication with the other two array dies, then the drivers 404a and 404b may drive a signal to all four of the array dies of this example.
Similar to the input/output port 402, the conduits 406a and 406b can be configured to receive a signal from the die interconnects that are in electrical communication with the conduits 406a and 406b. In turn, the signal received at one of the conduits 406a and 406b can be provided to drivers 408a and 408b respectively. The drivers 408a and 408b can each be configured to drive a signal received from a respective data conduit 406a and 406b to the input/output port 402 and to another component that may be in electrical communication with the input/output port 402, such as a MCH.
In some embodiments, one or more chip selects, as illustrated in
It should be noted that the driver structure 400 is a non-limiting example for arranging drivers in a control die. Other driver structures are possible. For example, instead of the drivers 404a and 408a being in electrical communication with the same conduit 406a, each of the drivers 404a and 408a can be in electrical communication with a separate conduit and consequently a separate die interconnect. In such an example, the drivers 404a and 408a may still be in electrical communication with the same input/output port 402, or each driver may be in electrical communication with a separate port, the driver 404a in electrical communication with an input port, and the driver 408a in communication with an output port.
In some implementations, the process 500 can comprise selecting a first subset of array dies and a second subset of array dies from a plurality of array dies (e.g., array dies 310), as shown in operational block 502. Generally, the first subset of array dies and the second subset of array dies may be exclusive of one another. Thus, the first subset of array dies does not include any array dies from the second subset of array dies and vice versa. However, in some cases there may be some overlap between the first subset of array dies and the second subset of array dies. Further, in some cases, at least one of the subsets of array dies includes more than one array die. For instance, the first subset of array dies may include two array dies, and the second subset of array dies may include one array die, which, depending on the embodiment, may or may not be included in the first subset of array dies.
Further, the first subset of array dies and the second subset of array dies may be selected to balance a load on a first driver and a load on a second driver based, at least in part, on the loads of the array dies 310 and on the loads of the die interconnect segments from a first and a second die interconnect. The first die interconnect may be in electrical communication with the first driver and the second die interconnect may be in electrical communication with the second driver. In some embodiments, the first subset of array dies and the second subset of array dies are selected to balance a load on a first conduit and a load on a second conduit. The load on each driver and/or conduit may be calculated using formula (1) as previously described above. In some embodiments, the first subset of array dies and the second subset of array dies may be selected to balance a load on a first driver and a load on a second driver based, at least in part, on the loads of the array dies 310 without considering the loads of the die interconnect segments from the first die interconnect and the second die interconnect.
The process 500 further comprises forming electrical connections between the first die interconnect and the first subset of array dies in an operational block 504. The process 500 further comprises forming electrical connections between the second die interconnect and the second subset of array dies in an operational block 506. Forming the electrical connections places the die interconnects in electrical communication with the respective subsets of array dies. In some embodiments, forming the electrical connections can comprise forming electrical connections between the die interconnects and at least one port from each array die of the respective subsets of array dies.
The process 500 further comprises selecting a driver size for a first driver at block 508 and selecting a driver size for a second driver at block 510. Selecting the driver size can be based, at least in part, on the calculated load on the driver. Generally, the greater the load on the driver, the larger the driver is selected to drive a signal along, for example, a die interconnect. The size of the driver may be adjusted by the selection of the transistor size and/or number of transistors included in the driver. A larger driver often consumes more power than a smaller driver. Thus, in certain embodiments, balancing the loads on the drivers to reduce the load on each driver can reduce the power consumption of a memory package.
In some embodiments, the size of the first driver and the size of the second driver are both less than the size sufficient for a driver to drive a signal along a die interconnect to each of the array dies 310 (e.g., with less than a predetermined or threshold signal degradation). The threshold signal degradation can be based on any one or more characteristics of a signal. For example, the threshold signal degradation can be based on the amplitude of the signal, the frequency of the signal, the noise distortion included in or introduced into the signal, or the shape of the signal, to name a few.
The process 500 further comprises forming electrical connections between the first die interconnect and the first driver in an operational block 512. Similarly, the process 500 further comprises forming electrical connections between the second die interconnect and the second driver in an operational block 514. Forming the electrical connections places the die interconnects in electrical communication with the respective drivers. In some embodiments, forming the electrical connections can comprise forming electrical connections between the die interconnects and a data conduit that includes the respective driver.
Advantageously, certain embodiments of the present disclosure reduce the load on each conduit and on each corresponding driver. In certain embodiments, reducing the load on a driver may increase the speed of data transfer between the array dies and other components in a computer system (e.g. a MCH or a processor). Further, reducing the load on a driver may result in reduced power consumption by the driver and consequently, by the memory package. In addition, certain embodiments of the present disclosure may minimize current switching noise.
Operational Modes
A proposed three-dimensional stacking (3DS) standard for dual in-line memory modules (DIMMs) being considered by the Joint Electron Devices Engineering Council (JEDEC) addresses three major shortcomings in the current JEDEC registered DIMM (RDIMM) and JEDEC load reduced DIMM (LRDIMM) standards (an example LRDIMM structure 600 is schematically illustrated in
Further, the LRDIMM structure 600 may have timing issues due to signals passing through a single memory buffer 601. In addition, the increased size of the data path of the LRDIMM architecture 600, compared to the HCDIMM architecture 602, an example of which is schematically illustrated in
Another component of the proposed 3DS-DIMM is a 3DS dynamic random-access memory (DRAM) package 720. The 3DS DRAM package 720 includes a plurality of stacked DDR DRAM chips 724 or array dies. The 3DS DRAM package 720 has a data I/O load that is equivalent to the data I/O load of a single-die DRAM package, regardless of the actual number of DRAM dies in the 3DS DRAM package 720. The 3DS DRAM package 720 may comprise a plurality of array dies (e.g., 2, 4 or 8 DDR DRAM dies) and a controller die 722. The controller die 722 may include data buffers, a data path timing controller, a secondary command/address buffer, a programmable secondary 1-to-2 rank decoder, and a data path signal (e.g., ODT, ODT, RTT) controller. Examples of such memory packages include HMC. The 3DS DRAM package 720 addresses the shortcomings (b) and (c) of the JEDEC RDIMM and LRDIMM listed above. However, there are deficiencies in the proposed 3DS-DIMM standard as described below.
The JEDEC DDR3 RDIMM standard contains two major components: a DDR3 register and a plurality of DRAM packages each comprising one or more DRAM chips or dies. The DDR3 register serves as a command/address signal buffer and as a command/control decoder. This DDR3 register holds a set of register control (RC) words, which a computer system configures to ensure the proper operation of the RDIMM. The DDR3 register contains a phase-lock-loop (PLL), which functions as a clock synchronizer for each RDIMM. The DDR3 register outputs a set of buffered command/address signals to all the DRAM packages on the RDIMM, but the data signals are directly fed to the DRAM packages from the system memory controller.
In contrast to the JEDEC DDR3 RDIMM standard, the 3DS-DIMM proposal requires the DRAM package 720 to include the controller die 722 that controls all data paths timing and operations. This arrangement of the DRAM package reduces the load on the data bus, however, it presents three significant shortcomings: 1) The command/address buffer in the 3DS DRAM package introduces clock cycle latency since it needs to provide clock synchronous operation to the DRAM dies in the package; 2) The data path control circuit (e.g., ODT, read/write data direction) in the control die becomes very complicated to support semi-synchronous (fly-by) data path control among all 3DS DRAM packages that are on a DIMM; and 3) The variations in the DRAM die timing characteristics within each 3DS DRAM package would be likely to require resynchronization of the data signals during the read/write operations, which increases the read/write latency and the read-to-write and write-to-read turn around time.
The 3DS-DIMM proposal can also be compared to the HyperCloud™ (HC) DIMM architecture of Netlist, Inc. An example of the HCDIMM architecture 602 is illustrated in
In certain embodiments described herein, a memory module architecture is proposed that includes a set of device components that support JEDEC 3DS operation with the benefit of RDIMM and HCDIMM architectures (see, e.g.,
The data path control circuit of certain embodiments may have at least two operational modes: mode-C (HCDIMM/RDIMM Compatible mode) and mode-3DS (3DS DIMM compatible mode). In mode-C, the array dies 824 (e.g. a DDSP) receive the data path control signals from the register device 812, which can be configured to control a command/address time slot and a data bus time slot. In mode-3DS, the control die 822 internally generates the data path control signals to ensure the proper operation of the data path.
The control die 822 of certain embodiments enables the memory module 800 to work as either a 3DS-DIMM, a RDIMM, or a HCDIMM. However, the memory module 800 may comprise a set of optional control input pins (in addition to the package pins that are included in 3DS-DRAM packages) which in mode-C receive the data path control signals from the register device 812.
As previously mentioned,
Further, in some embodiments, the memory control hub 802 may communicate with one or more memory modules. Each of the memory modules may be similar or substantially similar to the memory module 810. Alternatively, some of the memory modules may differ from memory module 810 in configuration, type, or both. For example, some of the memory modules may be capable of operating at different frequencies, may include a different amount of storage capability, or may be configured for different purposes (e.g. graphics versus non-graphics memory). Although in some cases a system may include memory modules capable of operating at different frequencies, each memory module may be configured to operate at the same frequency when used in a specific device. In certain implementations, the memory control hub 802 may set the operating frequency for the one or more memory modules.
The memory module 810 may include a register device 812, which is configured to receive command, address, or command and address signals from the memory control hub 802. For the purpose of simplifying discussion, and not to limit these signals, the signals will be referred to herein as command/address signals.
In some embodiments, the register device 812 receives the command/address signals via a command/address bus 814. The command/address bus 814, although illustrated as a single line, may include as many lines or signal conduits as the number of bits of the command/address signal.
Further, the register device 812 may generate data path control signals, which can be provided to a control die 822, or isolation device, of a memory package 820 via one or more data path control lines 816. In certain embodiments, the control dies 822 can include some or all of the embodiments described above with respect to the control dies 230 and 330. Moreover, in certain embodiments, the memory packages 820 can include some or all of the embodiments described above with respect to the memory package 200 and 300. In general, the memory module 812 may include one or more memory packages 820.
In certain embodiments, each control die 822, or isolation device, may be capable of address pass-through. Address pass-through, in some cases, enables the control die 822 to provide an address signal to one or more array dies 824 without decoding the address signal. This is possible, in some implementations, because the address signal received by the control die 822 is not encoded.
Some implementations of the control dies 822 include a plurality of command/address buffers (not shown). These buffers may comprise latches. In certain embodiments, the buffers are configured to hold command/address signals to control the timing of command/address signals. In some cases, controlling the timing of the command/address signals may reduce or slow signal degradation. In some implementations, the control dies 822 include a plurality of data buffers, which may control the timing of data signals to reduce or slow signal degradation. Further, the control dies 822 may include a data path control circuit (not shown) that is configured to control command/address time slots and data bus time slots. Controlling the command/address time slots and the data bus time slots enables the control dies 822 to reduce or prevent signal collisions caused by multiple memory packages 820 sharing the data path control lines 816 and the data bus 818. In some implementations, the data path control circuit may be separate from the control die 822.
Each of the control dies 822 may be configured to receive data signals from the memory control hub 802 via the data bus 818. Further, the control dies 822 may provide data signals to the memory control hub 802 via the data bus 818. The control dies 822 may also receive data path control signals and/or command/address signals from the register device 812 via the data path control lines 816.
As illustrated in
In some embodiments, the memory module 810 is selectively configurable into two operational modes. In the first operational mode, the register device 812 generates data path control signals provided to the control dies 822 via the data path control lines 816. The control dies 822 may decode command/address signals included with the data path control signals generated by the register device 812. In some implementations, the control dies 822 use the data path control signals to operate the data path control circuits of the control dies 822.
In the second operational mode, the control dies 822 may operate the data path control circuits to provide command/address signals to the array dies 824 without decoding the command/address signals. In this mode, the control dies 822 may use address pass-through to provide received address signals to the array dies 824.
Other operational modes may also be possible. In some embodiments, the data path control signals generated by the register device 812 may include decoded command/address signals that are decoded from command/address signals received from the memory control hub 802 via the command/address bus 814.
In some embodiments, the register device 812 may be configured to perform rank multiplication. In addition, or alternatively, the control dies 822 may be configured to perform rank multiplication. Embodiments of rank multiplication are described in greater detail in U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,289,386 and 7,532,537, each of which are incorporated in their entirety by reference herein. In such embodiments, the register device 812 can generate additional chip select signals that are provided to the array dies 824. For instance, if the memory control hub 802 is configured to recognize a single array die 824 per memory package 820, but there exists four array dies 824 per memory package 820, the memory control hub 802 may not provide the correct number of chip select signals to access a specific memory location of the plurality of array dies 824 is memory package 820. Thus, to access the specific memory location, the register device 812 can determine the array die that includes the specific memory location to be accessed based on the command/address signals received from the memory control hub 802 and can generate the correct chip select signal to access the array die that includes the specific memory location. In certain embodiments, when the memory module 810 is operating in the second operation module as described above, the memory module 810 does not perform rank multiplication.
Terminology
Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, throughout the description and the claims, the words “comprise,” “comprising,” and the like are to be construed in an inclusive sense, as opposed to an exclusive or exhaustive sense; that is to say, in the sense of “including, but not limited to.” The term “coupled” is used to refer to the connection between two elements, the term refers to two or more elements that may be either directly connected or connected by way of one or more intermediate elements. Additionally, the words “herein,” “above,” “below,” and words of similar import, when used in this application, shall refer to this application as a whole and not to any particular portions of this application. Where the context permits, words in the above Detailed Description using the singular or plural number may also include the plural or singular number respectively. The word “or” in reference to a list of two or more items covers all of the following interpretations of the word: any of the items in the list, all of the items in the list, and any combination of the items in the list.
The above detailed description of embodiments of the invention is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise form disclosed above. While specific embodiments of, and examples for, the invention are described above for illustrative purposes, various equivalent modifications are possible within the scope of the invention, as those skilled in the relevant art will recognize. For example, while processes or blocks are presented in a given order, alternative embodiments may perform routines having steps, or employ systems having blocks, in a different order, and some processes or blocks may be deleted, moved, added, subdivided, combined, and/or modified. Each of these processes or blocks may be implemented in a variety of different ways. Also, while processes or blocks are at times shown as being performed in series, these processes or blocks may instead be performed in parallel, or may be performed at different times.
The teachings of the invention provided herein can be applied to other systems, not necessarily the system described above. The elements and acts of the various embodiments described above can be combined to provide further embodiments.
Conditional language used herein, such as, among others, “can,” “might,” “may,” “e.g.,” and the like, unless specifically stated otherwise, or otherwise understood within the context as used, is generally intended to convey that certain embodiments include, while other embodiments do not include, certain features, elements and/or states. Thus, such conditional language is not generally intended to imply that features, elements and/or states are in any way required for one or more embodiments or that one or more embodiments necessarily include logic for deciding, with or without author input or prompting, whether these features, elements and/or states are included or are to be performed in any particular embodiment.
While certain embodiments of the inventions have been described, these embodiments have been presented by way of example only, and are not intended to limit the scope of the disclosure. Indeed, the novel methods and systems described herein may be embodied in a variety of other forms; furthermore, various omissions, substitutions and changes in the form of the methods and systems described herein may be made without departing from the spirit of the disclosure. The accompanying claims and their equivalents are intended to cover such forms or modifications as would fall within the scope and spirit of the disclosure.
This application is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 17/157,903, filed Jan. 25, 2021, which is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/412,308, filed May 14, 2019, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,902,886, which is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/602,099, filed May 22, 2017, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,602,099, which is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/095,288, filed Apr. 11, 2016, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,659,601 on May 23, 2017, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/337,168, filed Jul. 21, 2014, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/288,850, filed Nov. 3, 2011, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, which claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/409,893, filed Nov. 3, 2010, and entitled “Architecture For Memory Module With Packages Of Three-Dimensional Stacked (3ds) Memory Chips.” The disclosure of each of the above applications is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5345412 | Shiratsuchi | Sep 1994 | A |
5398210 | Higuchi | Mar 1995 | A |
5537584 | Miyai | Jul 1996 | A |
5563838 | Mart et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5617559 | Le | Apr 1997 | A |
5649159 | Le | Jul 1997 | A |
5655113 | Leung | Aug 1997 | A |
5717851 | Vishay | Feb 1998 | A |
5724604 | Moyer | Mar 1998 | A |
5729716 | Lee | May 1998 | A |
5784705 | Leung | Jul 1998 | A |
5802541 | Reed | Sep 1998 | A |
5905401 | Sher | May 1999 | A |
5973392 | Senba | Oct 1999 | A |
5991192 | Wang et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6011710 | Wiggers | Jan 2000 | A |
6031762 | Saitoh | Feb 2000 | A |
6070217 | Connolly | May 2000 | A |
6109929 | Jasper | Aug 2000 | A |
6173357 | Ju | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6243283 | Bertin | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6260127 | Olarig | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6414904 | So et al. | Jan 2002 | B2 |
6351827 | Co et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6381140 | Liao | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6418065 | Sato et al. | Jul 2002 | B2 |
6434044 | Gongwer et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6446158 | Karabatsos | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6466496 | Kuge | Oct 2002 | B2 |
6551857 | Leedy | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6553449 | Dodd | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6553450 | Dodd | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6556475 | Yamazaki et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6594167 | Yamasaki | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6611459 | Shiromoto et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6618791 | Dodd | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6621155 | Perino et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6656767 | King | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6664118 | Nishihara et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6677671 | King | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6683372 | Wong | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6704910 | Hong | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6717855 | Underwood | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6721860 | Klein | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6747887 | Halbert | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6788592 | Nakata | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6832303 | Tanaka | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6889335 | Hargis et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6948084 | Manapat et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
7019553 | Blodgett et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7024518 | Halbert | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7034569 | Balasubramanian et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7046538 | Thomas | May 2006 | B2 |
7078793 | Ruckerbauer et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7093066 | Klein | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7098541 | Adelmann | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7102905 | Funaba | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7123497 | Matsui | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7130308 | Haddock | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7133960 | Thompson | Nov 2006 | B1 |
7161820 | Funaba et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7166934 | Dewey | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7177187 | Ishii | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7200021 | Raghuram | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7209376 | Saito | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7215561 | Park | May 2007 | B2 |
7221617 | Flach et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7242635 | Okuda | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7254036 | Pauley | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7269042 | Kinsley | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7269764 | Dart et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7280417 | Choi et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7286436 | Bhakta | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7289386 | Bhakta | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7334150 | Ruckerbauer | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7375970 | Pauley | May 2008 | B2 |
7379316 | Rajan | May 2008 | B2 |
7379361 | Co | May 2008 | B2 |
7426649 | Brittain et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7442050 | Bhakta | Oct 2008 | B1 |
7460418 | Jung | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7464225 | Tsern | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7466577 | Sekiguchi | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7495943 | Takemura et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7532537 | Solomon | May 2009 | B2 |
7558096 | Ikeda | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7587559 | Brittain et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7613880 | Miura et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7619893 | Yu | Nov 2009 | B1 |
7619912 | Bhakta | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7630202 | Pauley | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7633165 | Hsu | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7633785 | Kim | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7636274 | Solomon | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7644216 | Fahr et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7656735 | Kagan et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7679967 | Chung et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7683459 | Ma | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7760533 | Alzheimer | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7774535 | Nakamura | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7796446 | Ruckerbauer | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7811097 | Bhakta | Oct 2010 | B1 |
7827348 | Lee | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7830692 | Chung | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7830706 | Hanzawa et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7834440 | Ito | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7839645 | Pauley | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7864627 | Bhakta | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7865674 | Gower | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7881150 | Solomon | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7890811 | Rothman | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7894229 | Lahtinen | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7894230 | Kim | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7907434 | Matsuzaki et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7969192 | Wyman | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7978721 | Jeddeloh | Jul 2011 | B2 |
7990171 | Chung | Aug 2011 | B2 |
7990746 | Rajan | Aug 2011 | B2 |
7999367 | Kang | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8001434 | Lee et al. | Aug 2011 | B1 |
8019589 | Rajan | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8033836 | Bhakta | Oct 2011 | B1 |
8041881 | Rajan | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8064222 | Nishio | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8081536 | Solomon | Dec 2011 | B1 |
8089795 | Rajan | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8094504 | Smolka | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8120958 | Bilger | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8130560 | Rajan | Mar 2012 | B1 |
8174115 | Chung | May 2012 | B2 |
8179737 | Byeon | May 2012 | B2 |
8189328 | Kanapathippillai | May 2012 | B2 |
8233303 | Best | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8258619 | Foster, Sr. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8259461 | Hollis | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8281074 | Jeddeloh | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8295070 | Fukano | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8310841 | Foster | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8315068 | Foster | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8325539 | Park | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8341336 | Chang et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8352896 | Thayer | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8421237 | Chia et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8432027 | Foster et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8369122 | Byeon | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8384417 | Laisne et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8400781 | Gillingham | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8411478 | Yun | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8417870 | Lee | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8437163 | Nakanishi et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8471362 | Lee | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8473653 | Kondo et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8476767 | Lee | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8488399 | Yu et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8516185 | Lee | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8516409 | Coteus | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8566556 | Rajan | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8582373 | Hollis | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8654593 | Oh et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8659136 | Youn | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8681546 | Fai et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8689064 | Lee | Apr 2014 | B1 |
8743582 | Kang et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8756364 | Bhakta | Jun 2014 | B1 |
8782350 | Lee | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8787060 | Lee | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8803545 | Yoko et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8817547 | Veches | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8817549 | Shin et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8830715 | Yu et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8866303 | Kim | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8867286 | Wu | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8873282 | Min | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8891278 | Stephens, Jr. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
8897053 | Stephens, Jr. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
8930647 | Smith | Jan 2015 | B1 |
8943224 | Ware et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8949538 | Jeddeloh | Feb 2015 | B2 |
9087555 | Nomoto et al. | Jul 2015 | B2 |
9123552 | Keeth | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9142262 | Ware | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9160349 | Ma | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9171824 | Best | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9177609 | Manuel et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9318160 | Lee | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9484326 | Keeth et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9502345 | Sunpil et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9659601 | Lee | May 2017 | B2 |
10290328 | Lee | May 2019 | B2 |
10902886 | Lee | Jan 2021 | B2 |
20010008006 | Klein | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20020038405 | Leddige | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020048195 | Klein | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020112119 | Halbert | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20030070052 | Lai | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20040098528 | Janzen | May 2004 | A1 |
20050010737 | Ware | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050257109 | Averbuj | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050281096 | Bhakta | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060117152 | Amidi | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060136765 | Poisner et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060202317 | Barakat et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060233012 | Sekiguchi | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060259678 | Gervasi | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060262586 | Solomon et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060277355 | Ellsberry | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060294437 | Washburn et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070070669 | Tsern | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070096332 | Satoh | May 2007 | A1 |
20070293094 | Aekins | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080025123 | Rajan | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080025134 | Rajan | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080025137 | Rajan | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080094808 | Kanapathippillai | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080104352 | Talbot | May 2008 | A1 |
20080162790 | Im | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080253085 | Soffer | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080296779 | Matsui | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080307240 | Dahan et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090020608 | Bennett et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090027844 | Chen et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090070727 | Solomon | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090103345 | McLaren | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090103387 | Shau | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090248969 | Wu | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090290442 | Rajan | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090296503 | Chu | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100020583 | Kang | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100090338 | Lee | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100091537 | Best | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100110745 | Jeddeloh | May 2010 | A1 |
20100110748 | Best | May 2010 | A1 |
20100125681 | Patel | May 2010 | A1 |
20100174858 | Chen | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100195364 | Riho | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20110006360 | Ikebuchi | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110016250 | Lee | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110016269 | Lee | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110026293 | Riho | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110050320 | Gillingham | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110085408 | Solomon et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110103156 | Kim | May 2011 | A1 |
20110108888 | Or-Bach | May 2011 | A1 |
20110125966 | Amidi | May 2011 | A1 |
20110125982 | Choi | May 2011 | A1 |
20110156232 | Youn | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110169171 | Marcoux | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110175639 | Yoko | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110193226 | Kirby | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110208906 | Gillingham | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110211411 | Ide | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20120106229 | Kondo | May 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
102576565 | Sep 2015 | CN |
1816570 | Aug 2007 | EP |
09237492 | Sep 1997 | JP |
10092169 | Oct 1998 | JP |
2010320270 | Dec 1998 | JP |
2000285674 | Oct 2000 | JP |
2000311485 | Oct 2000 | JP |
2002184176 | Jun 2002 | JP |
2003007963 | Jan 2003 | JP |
2008046989 | Feb 2008 | JP |
20050073902 | Jul 2005 | KR |
WO1999030240 | Jun 1999 | WO |
WO2005117021 | Dec 2005 | WO |
WO2010021410 | Feb 2010 | WO |
WO2010138480 | Dec 2010 | WO |
WO2011049710 | Apr 2011 | WO |
WO2011094437 | Aug 2011 | WO |
Entry |
---|
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘First Amended Complaint,’ filed May 3, 2022, 71 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, Defendant's P.R. 3-3 Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. Nos. 9,318,160 and 8,787,060, filed Jul. 13, 2022, 199 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of Admitted Prior Art,’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 39 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2008/0025137 (Rajan 137),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 42 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2011/0103156 (Kim),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 43 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 9,142,262 (Ware),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 33 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2011/0026293 (Riho 293),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 53 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2010/0195364 (Riho 364),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 46 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2010/0091537 (Best),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 60 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 8,258,619 (Foster),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 24 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2010/0110745 (Jeddeloh),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 36 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2011/0208906 (Gillingham),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 61 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 8,120,958 (Bilger),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 45 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 9,123,552 (Keeth),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 47 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 7,969,192 (Wyman),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 31 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 9,160,349 (Ma),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 66 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 7,796,446 (Ruckerbauer),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 44 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of Gabriel H. Loh, 3D-Stacked Memory Architectures for Multi-Core Processors, Georgia Institute of Technology, International Symposium on Computer Architecture (2008) (Loh),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 28 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 8,041,881 (Rajan 881),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 65 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of JEDEC Proposals regarding High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) and Low Power Memories (JEDEC HBM and Low Power Proposals),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 95 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of Micron Hybrid Memory Cube,’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 30 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 8,471,362 (Lee),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 104 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of Admitted Prior Art,’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 96 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2008/0025137 (Rajan 137),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 61 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2011/0103156 (Kim),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 65 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 9,142,262 (Ware),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 60 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2011/0026293 (Riho 293),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 71 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2010/0195364 (Riho 364),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 66 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2010/0091537 (Best),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 76pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 8,258,619 (Foster),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 43 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2010/0110745 (Jeddeloh),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 53 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2011/0208906 (Gillingham),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 81 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 8,120,958 (Bilger),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 63 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 9,123,552 (Keeth),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 65 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 7,969,192 (Wyman),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 48 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 9,160,349 (Ma),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 101 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 7,796,446 (Ruckerbauer),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 67 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of Gabriel H. Loh, 3D-Stacked Memory Architectures for Multi-Core Processors, Georgia Institute of Technology, International Symposium on Computer Architecture (2008) (Loh),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 46 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 8,041,881 (Rajan 881),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 82 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of JEDEC Proposals regarding High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) and Low Power Memories (JEDEC HBM and Low Power Proposals),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 114pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of Micron Hybrid Memory Cube,’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 50 pages. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Invalidity of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060 in View of U.S. Pat. No. 8,471,362 (Lee),’ filed Jul. 13, 2022, 124 pages. |
JEDEC Proposal, ‘Future Mobile Memory (FMM) Wide I/O Refresh Scheme,’ Item #1777.18, Sep. 10, 2010, 3 pages. |
JEDEC Proposal, ‘Wide I/O Ball Map Baseline Proposal,’ Item #1777.29, Jun. 2010, 4 pages. |
JEDEC Proposal, ‘Read Clock Proposal,’ FMD—Wide IO TG, Mar. 2010, 6 pages. |
JEDEC Proposal, ‘Advanced Memory Package Proposal,’ Item #1782.01, Mar. 2010, 7 pages. |
JEDEC Proposal, ‘Wide-IO TG Report,’ FM-Mobile Wide IO TG, Item #1777.00, Dec. 2009, 13 pages. |
JEDEC Proposal, ‘MIPI@M-PHY Future Mobile PHY Proposal,’ JC42.6 Item #1776.10, Sep. 2009, 38 pages. |
JEDEC Proposal, ‘A Stackable, Configurable Memory Sheet for ASICs: A First Showing,’ 2011 TG, Item #1787.01, Sep. 13, 2010, 11 pages. |
JEDEC Proposal, ‘Future High Bandwidth Memory TG,’ TG42_1: TG Report, Item #1797.00, Sep. 2011, 20 pages. |
JEDEC Proposal, ‘TSV Tile Memory Clocking & Command,’ 2011 TG, Item #1787.05, Apr. 2021/22, 5 pages. |
JEDEC Proposal, ‘Future High Bandwidth Memory TG,’ TG42_1: TG Report, Item #1797.00, Jun. 2011, 18 pages. |
J. Thomas Pawlowski Presentation, ‘Hybrid Memory Cube (HMC),’ Hot Chips 23, © 2011 Micron Technology, Inc. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist, Inc. v. Micron Technology, Inc., Case 2.22-cn-00203-JRG-RSP, “Complaint,” filed Jun. 22, 2010, 71 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion, PCT/US2011/059209, dated Jan. 31, 2013. |
“Posts Tagged ‘3D Stacking’,” from Chip Design Mag., http://chipdesignmag.com/lpd/blog/tag/3d-stacking/ (Printed Oct. 13, 2011). |
Ahmad et al., “Modeling of peak-to-peak switching noise along a vertical chain of power distribution TSV pairs in a 30 stack of ICs interconnected through TSVs,” Norchip Conference, Article No. 5669473, Nov. 15-16, 2010, IEEE Computer Society. |
Altera, ACEX iK, Programmable Logic Device Family, Data Sheet, May 2003, Ver 3.4. |
Anonymous. (Dec. 1996). “Applications Note: Understanding DRAM Operation,” IBM, 10 pages. |
Behrens, S. “HP Printer Memory Explained”, The ZonkPage, Last Updated Jan. 21, 2004. Accessed Feb. 10, 2013, Retrieved from the Internet: URL <http://warshaft.com/hpmem.htm>. 7pp. |
Black et al., “Die Stacking (30) Microarchitecture,” MICR0-39, 39th Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on, Dec. 2006, 469-479, Orlando, FL. |
Daneshtalab et al., “CMIT—A novel cluster-based topology for 30 stacked architectures,” 30 Systems Integration Conference (3DIC), 2010 IEEE International, Nov. 16-18, 2010, pp. 1-5. |
Excerpts from the Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standard Terms, Seventh Edition, Standards Information Network, IEEE Press (2000), pp. 349-411. |
Excerpts from the Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standard Terms, Seventh Edition, Standards Information Network, IEEE Press (2000), pp. 133-265. |
Funaya et al., “Cache partitioning strategies for 3-D stacked vector processors,” IEEE 30 System Integration Conference, article No. 5751453, Nov. 16-18, 2010, IEEE Computer Society. |
Ghosh et al., “Smart Refresh: An Enhancement Memory Controller Design for Reducing Energy in Conventional and 30 Die-Stacked DRAMs,” Microarchitecture, 2007, 401h Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium, Dec. 1-5, 2007, pp. 134-145. |
Horowitz, “The Art of Electronics,” Cambridge Univ. Press, 1989, selected pages. |
Huang et al, “An Efficient Parallel Transparent BIST Method for Multiple Embedded Memory Buffers,” VLSI Design 2001, p. 379. |
Jacob, Bruce L.; “Synchronous DRAM Architectures, Organizations, and Alternative Technologies”. University of Maryland, Dec. 10, 2002. |
Jacob, Bruce, et al. “Memory Systems—Cache, DRAM, Disk,” Elsevier Inc. 2008, Chapters 7 and 10. |
Kang et al., “Signal integrity and reliability of a new Multi-Stack Package using a Pressure Conductive Rubber,” Electrical Design of Advanced Packaging and Systems Symposium, 214-17, Dec. 2008, Seoul, South Korea. |
Kawano, “A 30 Packaging Technology for High-Density Stacked DRAM,” VLSI Technology, Systems and Applications, 2007, Apr. 23-25, 2007, pp. 1-2. |
Kim et al., A Quantitative Analysis of Performance Benefits of 30 Die Stacking on Mobile and Embedded Soc. |
Kurita et al., “A 3-D packaging technology with highly-parallel memory/logic interconnect,” IEICE Transactions on Electronics, v E92-C, No. 12, pp. 1512-1522, 2009, Maruzen Col, Ltd. |
Kurita et al., “Vertical Integration of Stacked DRAM and High-Speed Logic Device Using SMAFTI Technology,” Advanced Packaging, IEEE Transactions, Aug. 2009, vol. 32 Issue 3, pp. 657-665. |
Loh, “3D-Stacked Memory Architectures for Multi-core Processors,” Proceedings of the 35th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA '08), 453-464, IEEE Computer Society, Washington DC, USA. |
McCluskey, Edward J., Logic Design Principles with Emphasis on Testable Semicustom Circuits, Prentice Hall, 1986, pp. 104-107 and 119-120. |
Microsoft Computer Dictionary, Fifth Edition, Microsoft Press, p. 334, 2002. |
Reese, “Introduction to Logic Synthesis using Verilog HDL,” Morgan&Claypool Publishers, 2006, pp. 1-28. |
Russell, Gill, “Intel Micron Hybrid Memory Cube: The Future of Exascale Computing,” Bright Side of News. Sep. 19, 2011, <http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2011/9/19/intel-micron-hybrid-memory-cube-the-future-of-exascale-computing aspx> Printed Oct. 13, 2011 in 8 pages. |
Val, “The 3D interconnection applications for mass memories and microprocessors,” Proceedings of the Technical Conference, 1991 International Electronic Packaging Conference, 851-60, vol. 2, 1991, Int. Electron. Packaging Soc, Wheaton, IL, USA, 2008. |
Weis et al., “Design space exploration for 3D-stacked DRAMs,” Proceedings—Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition, 2011. |
Zhang et al., “A Customized Design of DRAM Controller for On-Chip 3D DRAM Stacking,” Custom Integrated Circuits Conference (CICC), 2010 IEEE, Sep. 19-22, 2010, pp. 1-4. |
JEDEC Standard No. 21-C Section 4.5.7, 168 Pin Registered SDRAM DIMM Family, Release 7. |
JEDEC 21-C, Section 4..6.1, 278 Pin Buffered SDRAM DIMM Family. |
JEDEC Standard No. 21-C Section 4.1.2.5, Appendix E, “Specific PD's for Synchronous DRAM (SDRAM),” pp. 1-25. |
JEDEC Standard, “Fully Buffered DIMM (FBDIMM): DFx Design for Validation and Test,” JESD82-28, Feb. 2008. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01029, Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, filed on Jun. 24, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01029, Exhibit 1008 to Petition for Inter Partes Review, “Declaration of Charles J. Neuhauser, Ph.D. under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68,” filed on Jun. 24, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01029, Supplemental Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, filed on Jul. 23, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01029, Patent Owner's Preliminary Response pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.107, filed on Oct. 17, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01029, Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review 37 C.F.R. § 42.108, issued Dec. 16, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01029, Petitioner's Request for Rehearing pursuant to 37C.F.R. § 42.71, filed on Jan. 15, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01029, Decision Denying Request for Rehearing, Issued on Mar. 3, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-00882, Exhibit 1023, ‘Dr. Srinivasan Jagannathan Supplemental Declaration,’ filed Jun. 19, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-00882, Exhibit 2002, ‘Declaration of Professor Carl Sechen,’ filed May 8, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-00882, Final Written Decision 35 USC 318 and 37 CFR 42.73. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-00882, Patent Owner Response, filed May 8, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-00882, Petitioner Diablo Technologies, Inc.'s Reply to Patent Owner Netlist, Inc.'s Response, filed Jun. 19, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-00883, Exhibit 1026, ‘Dr. Srinivasan Jagannathan Supplemental Declaration,’ filed Jun. 19, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-00883, Final Written Decision—35 USC 318 and 37 CFR 42.73, filed Dec. 14, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-00883, Patent Owner Response, filed May 8, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-00883, Petitioner Diablo Technologies, Inc.'s Reply to Patent Owner Netlist, Inc.'s Response, filed Jun. 19, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-01011, Exhibit 1028, ‘Dr. Srinivasan Jagannathan Supplemental Declaration,’ filed Jun. 19, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-01011, Final Written Decision—35 USC 318 and 37 CFR 42.73, filed Dec. 14, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-01011, Patent Owner Response, filed May 8, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. 2014-01011, Petitioner Diablo Technologies, Inc.'s Reply to Patent Owner Netlist, Inc.'s Response, filed Jun. 19, 2015. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-00882, Corrected Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,150, filed on Jul. 8, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-00882, Exhibit 1007 to Petition for Inter Partes Review, “Declaration of Dr. Srinivasan Jagannathan,” filed on Jun. 22, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-00883, Corrected Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,081,536, filed on Jul. 8, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-00883, Exhibit 1011 to Petition for Inter Partes Review, “Declaration of Dr. Srinivasan Jagannathan,” filed on Jun. 21, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01011, Corrected Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,150, filed on Jul. 8, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01011, Exhibit 1007 to Petition for Inter Partes Review, “Declaration of Dr. Srinivasan Jagannathan.” filed on Jun. 22, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01369, Corrected Petition for Inter Partes Review of Claims 1-19 of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, filed on Sep. 22, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01369, Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review 37 C.F.R. § 42.108, issued Mar. 9, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01369, Exhibit 1008 to Corrected Petition for Inter Partes Review, “Declaration of Dr. Nader Bagherzadeh under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68,” filed on Sep. 22, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01369, Exhibit 1014 to Corrected Petition for Inter Partes Review, “Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics Terms,” IEEE 1988, filed on Sep. 22, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,150, IPR Case No. IPR2014-00882, Decision—Institution of Inter Partes Review 37 C.F.R. § 42.108, issued Dec. 16, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,150, IPR Case No. IPR2014-01011, Decision—Institution of Inter Partes Review 37 C.F.R. § 42.108, issued Dec. 16, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,150, IPR Case No. IPR2014-01011, Exhibit 3001 to Decision—Institution of Inter Partes Review, Excerpts from IEEE Dictionary, issued Dec. 16, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,150, IPR Case No. IPR2014-01011, Exhibit 3002 to Decision—Institution of Inter Partes Review, Excerpts from IEEE Dictionary, issued Dec. 16, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,150, IPR Case No. IPR2014-01011, Exhibit 3003 to Decision—Institution of Inter Partes Review, Excerpts from Oxford English Dictionary, issued Dec. 16, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,150, IPR Case No. IPR2014-01011, Exhibit 3004 to Decision—Institution of Inter Partes Review, Excerpts from Oxford English Dictionary, issued Dec. 16, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,150, Case No. IPR2015-01020, Exhibit 2001, “Declaration of Professor Carl Sechen,” filed Feb. 22, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,150, Case No. IPR2015-01020, Patent Owner Response to Petition, filed Feb. 22, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,150, Case No. IPR2015-01020, Petitioner1s Reply, filed May 19, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,881,150, Case No. IPR2015-01020, Supplemental Declaration of Dr. Jagannathan, filed May 19, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,081,536, IPR Case No. IPR2014-00883, Decision—Institution of Inter Partes Review 37 C.F.R. § 42.108, issued Dec. 16, 2014. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,081,536, Case No. IPR2015-01021, Exhibit 2001, “Declaration of Professor Carl Sechen,” filed Feb. 22, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,081,536, Case No. IPR2015-01021, Patent Owner Response to Petition, filed Feb. 22, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,081,536, Case No. IPR2015-01021, Petitioner1s Reply, filed May 19, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,081,536, Case No. IPR2015-01021, Supplemental Declaration of Dr. Jagannathan, filed May 19, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,532,537 B2, Case No. IPR2017-00667, Final Written Decision, filed Jul. 18, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 7,532,537 B2, Case No. IPR2017-00668, Final Written Decision, filed Jul. 18, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185 B2, Case No. IPR2017-00577, Final Written Decision, filed Jul. 5, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907 B2, Case No. IPR2018-00362, and Case No. IPR2018-00363, Decision Granting Institution of Inter Partes Review, filed Aug. 6, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, Case No. IPR2017-00577, Exhibits 1003, ‘Declaration of Harold S. Stone,’ filed Jan. 5, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, Case No. IPR2017-00577, Exhibits 1007, ‘JEDEC JESD79 publication (Jun. 2000),’ filed Jan. 5, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, Case No. IPR2017-00577, Exhibits 1009, ‘TI 74LS245 datasheet (2002),’ filed Apr. 10, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, Case No. IPR2017-00577, Patent Owner's Preliminary Response, filed Apr. 10, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, Case No. IPR2017-00577, Patent Owner's Response, filed Oct. 25, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, Case No. IPR2017-00577, Petitioners' Reply to Patent Owner's Response, filed Feb. 6, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, Case No. IPR2017-00577, Trial Instituted Document, filed Jul. 7, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1002, ‘Excerpts of FH for U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364,’ filed Dec. 30, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1003, ‘Declaration of Harold Stone,’ filed Dec. 15, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1007, ‘JEDEC JESD79 publication (Jun. 2000),’ filed Dec. 30, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1008, ‘JEDEC Declaration for DDR Specification,’ filed Dec. 30, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1015, ‘Texas Instruments 74LS245 datasheet (2002),’ filed Dec. 30, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1017, ‘2000-03 Samsung CMOS SDRM data sheet,’ filed Sep. 15, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1019, ‘Final Decision [IPR2014-01011],’ filed Sep. 15, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1020, ‘Final Decision [IPR2014-00883],’ filed Dec. 30, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1023, ‘Gordon Moore 1965 article,’ filed Dec. 30, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1026, ‘Xilinx CoolRunner XPLA3 CPLD product specification (2000),’ filed Dec. 15, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1027, ‘Xilinx Programmable Logic Design Quick Start Handbook (2004),’ filed Jan. 9, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1028, ‘Xilinx TQFP package datasheet (2000),’ filed Jan. 9, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1029, ‘Xilinx VQFP package datasheet (2002),’ filed Feb. 9, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1030, ‘Xilinx CS280 package datasheet (1999),’ filed Dec. 15, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 1031, ‘Petitioners Demonstratives,’ filed Apr. 9, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 2001, ‘Exhibit 2001,’ filed Dec. 15, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 2002, ‘Exhibit 2002,’ filed Dec. 15, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 2003, ‘Exhibit 2003,’ filed Feb. 9, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 2004, ‘Exhibit 2004,’ filed Dec. 30, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Exhibits 2005, ‘Exhibit 2005,’ filed Sep. 15, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Final Written Decision, filed May 3, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Patent Owner's Preliminary Response, filed Apr. 9, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Patent Owner's Response, filed Sep. 15, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Petition for Inter Partes Review, filed Dec. 30, 2016. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,756,364, Case No. IPR2017-00549, Trial Instituted Document, filed May 15, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907 B2, Case No. IPR2018-00364, and Case No. IPR2018-00365, Decision Granting Institution of Inter Partes Review, filed Jun. 29, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1003, ‘Declaration of Dr. Harold Stone,’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1009, ‘JEDEC Standard Double Data Rate DDR SDRAM Specification, JESD79 Jun. 2000,’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1010, ‘JEDEC Standard 21-C, DDR SDRAM Registered DIMM Design Specification Jan. 2002,’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1011, ‘JEDEC Standard DDR2 SDRAM Specification, JESD79-2B Jan. 2005,’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1012, ‘Declaration of John J. Kelly Regarding Records of Joint Electron Device Engineering Council JEDEC,’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1022, ‘Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, SanDisk Corp. v. Netlist, Inc., IPR2014-01029, Paper No. 11 Dec. 16, 2014,’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1023, ‘Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, Smart Modular Techs. Inc. v. Netlist, Inc., IPR2014-01369, Paper No. 12 Mar. 9, 2015,’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1024, ‘Excerpts from the Hearing in Certain Memory Modules and Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1023 May 8, 2017,’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1025, ‘Complainant Netlist, Inc.'s Initial Post-Hearing Brief, Certain Memory Modules and Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1023 May 30, 2017 excerpts relevant to '185 patent,’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1026, ‘Respondents' Post-Hearing Brief, Certain Memory Modules and Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1023 May 30, 2017 excerpts relevant to '185 patent,’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1027, ‘High-quality versions of demonstrative graphics included in Respondents' Post-Hearing Brief (Ex. 1026),’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1028, ‘Complainant Netlist Inc.'s Reply Post-Hearing Brief, Certain Memory Modules and Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1023 (Jun. 9, 2017) (excerpts relevant to '185 patent),’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1029, ‘Respondents' Reply Post-Hearing Brief, Certain Memory Modules and Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1023 (Jun. 9, 2017) (excerpts relevant to '185 patent),’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1030, ‘High-quality versions of demonstrative graphics included in Respondents' Reply Post-Hearing Brief (Ex.1029),’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1031, ‘Institution of Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,516,185, SK hynix Inc. et al. v. Netlist, Inc., IPR2017-00577, Paper No. 8 (Jul. 7, 2017),’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1032, ‘Final Written Decision, Diablo Techs., Inc. v. Netlist, Inc., IPR2014-00882, Paper No. 33 (Dec. 14, 2015),’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1033, ‘Netlist, Inc. v. Diablo Techs., Inc., No. 2016-1742 (Fed. Cir. Jul. 25, 2017),’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1034, ‘Netlist's Infringement Claim Chart for U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907 Jun. 14, 2017,’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1035, ‘Stone, H.S. Microcomputer Interfacing, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1982,’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1039, ‘Intel E7525 Memory Controller Hub (MCH) Chipset Datasheet (Jun. 2004),’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1040, ‘Initial Determination, Certain Memory Modules and Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1023 (Nov. 14, 2017) (redacted excerpts),’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1041, ‘Bruce Jacob et al., Memory System: Cache, DRAM, Disk (2008) (excerpts),’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1042, ‘Direct RDRAM datasheet (2000),’ filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Exhibits 1048, ‘Certified translation of the Preliminary Opinion issued by the German Patent and Trademark Office (dated Jan. 8, 2019),’ filed Feb. 11, 2019. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Paper 14, ‘Patent Owner's Response,’ filed Oct. 19, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Paper 23, ‘Corrected Petitioners' Reply to Patent Owner's Response,’ filed Feb. 20, 2019. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00362, Paper 29, ‘Termination Decision Document,’ filed Jun. 27, 2019. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00363, Petition for Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, filed Dec. 22, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00363, Preliminary Response, filed Apr. 10, 2018. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00364, Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, filed Dec. 27, 2017. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Case No. IPR2018-00365, Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, filed Dec. 27, 2017. |
Examination Report, European Patent Application No. 10730021.2, dated Apr. 14, 2014. |
Response to Examination Report, European Patent Application No. 10730021.2, dated Jun. 4, 2014. |
Examination Report, European Patent Application No. 10730021.2, dated Apr. 29, 2015. |
Response to Examination Report, European Patent Application No. 10730021.2, dated Apr. 29, 2015, filed Nov. 4, 2015. |
English Translation of the Notice of Grounds for Rejection, Korean Patent Application No. 2012-7004038, dated May 11, 2016. |
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 13/970,606, filed Aug. 20, 2013, dated Jun. 27, 2016. |
Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/970,606, filed Aug. 20, 2013, dated Nov. 23, 2015. |
Response to Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/970,606, filed Aug. 20, 2013, dated Mar. 23, 2016. |
Response, Article 94 3 EPC, EO 18179414.0, Aug. 6, 2019, 23 pgs. |
Netlist, Inc., Third Party Observation, EP 3404660, Aug. 6, 2019, 34 pgs. |
Office Action, EP 18179414, dated Apr. 2, 2019, 6 pgs. |
Patent document filed by third party, EP 18179414, Feb. 22, 2019, 10 pgs. |
Observations by third parties, EP 18179414.0, Feb. 22, 2019, 1 pg. |
Patent Document filed by a third party, Feb. 20, 2019, 10 pgs. |
Netlist, Inc., Observations by third parties, EP 3404660, Feb. 20, 2019, 46 pgs. |
Reply to Written Opinion prepared by the EPO, EP 18179414.0, dated Jan. 17, 2019, 20 pgs. |
Netlist, Inc., Information on Search Strategy, EP 18179414, Oct. 23, 2018, 1 pg. |
European Search Report, EP 18179414, dated Oct. 23, 2018, 3 pgs. |
European Search Opinion, EP 18179414, dated Oct. 23, 2018, 3 pgs. |
CN201080039043.0, ‘Certified translation of the Examination Decision issued by the State Intellectual Property Office of the P.R.C. (dated May 30, 2018),’ May 30, 2018, 43 pgs. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01428, Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, filed Aug. 26, 2022. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01428, Patent Owner Prelminary Response, filed Jan. 19, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01428, Petitioner's Authorized Reply to POPR, filed Feb. 17, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01428, PO's Preliminary Sur-Reply, filed Mar. 1, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01428, Institution Decision: Granting Institution of Inter Partes Review 35 U.S.C. sec. 314, filed Apr. 12, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01427, Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, filed Aug. 26, 2022. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01427, Patent Owner Prelminary Response, filed Jan. 19, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01427, Petitioner's Authorized Reply to POPR, filed Feb. 17, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01427, Patent Owner's Preliminary Sur-Reply, filed Mar. 1, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01427, Institution Decision: Granting Institution of Inter Partes Review 35 U.S.C. sec. 314, filed Apr. 12, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01428, Exhibit 1003, ‘Wolfe declaration,’ filed Aug. 26, 2022. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01427, Exhibit 1003, ‘Wolfe declaration,’ filed Aug. 26, 2022. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01427, EX2009, ‘Park, Sung Joo Deposition Transcript (Nov. 23, 2022),’ filed Jan. 19, 2023. |
IPR2018-00362, U.S. Pat. No. 9,606,907, Final Written Decision, entered: Jun. 27, 2019, 94 pgs. |
IPR2017-00667, U.S. Pat. No. 7,532,537 B2, Final Written Decision 35 U.S.C. § 318(a) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.73, entered Jul. 18, 2018, 44 pgs. |
IPR2017-00668, U.S. Pat. No. 7,532,537 B2, Final Written Decision 35 U.S.C. § 318(a) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.73, entered Jul. 18, 2018, 46 pgs. |
USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Appeal 2014-007777, Inter Partes Reexamination Control Nos. 95/000,577 & 95/000,577, U.S. Pat. No. 7,289,386, Decision On Appeal, issued Feb. 25, 2015, 25 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Samsung's Motion for Summary Judgment,’ filed Feb. 10, 2023, 19 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Defendants' P.R. 4-2(A) Preliminary Claim Construction and Extrinsic Evidence,’ Aug. 5, 2022, 55 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, “Samsung Defendants' Proposed Constructions of Disputed Claim Terms and Supporting Evidence,” filed on Aug. 19, 2022, 69 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, “Defendants' Responsive Claim Construction Brief,” filed Sep. 16, 2022, 38 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Claim Construction Order,’ filed Dec. 14, 2022, 35 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, “Plaintiff Netlist Inc.'s objections to the magistrate judge's memorandum opinion and order regarding claim construction,” filed on Dec. 28, 2022, 23 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, “Defendants' Response to Netlist's Objections to Claim Construction Memorandum Order,” filed on Jan. 11, 2023, 11 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, “Plaintiff Netlist Inc.'s Opposition to Samsung's Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement,” filed Feb. 23, 2023, 23 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, “Samsung's Fourth Amended Initial and Additional Disclosures,” filed Dec. 6, 2022, 23 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Netlist Inc.'s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Samsung's Invalidity Defenses,’ filed on Feb. 9, 2023, 22 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Samsung's Opposition to Netlist's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Samsung's Invalidity Defenses,’ filed on Feb. 22, 2023, 29 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘Complaint’ filed Dec. 20, 2021, 49 pgs. |
USDC, ED Texas, Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, ‘The Samsung Defendants' Answerto First Amended Complaint,’ filed May 18, 2022, 53 pgs. |
JEDEC Standard No. 21-C, GDDR4 Specific SGRAM Functions, p. 3.11.5.8, From JEDEC Board Ballot JCB-06-007, Formulated Under the Cognizance of the JC42.3 Sub-Committee on DRAM Parametrics, Release1.0, Nov. 2005. |
JEDEC Standard No. 21-C, “PC2100 and PC1600 DDR SDRAM Registered DIMM,” Revision 1.3, Jan. 2002. |
JEDEC Standard No. 79-3C, DDR3 SDRAM, JESD79-3C, Revision of JESD79-3B, Apr. 2008. |
JEDEC Standard No. MO-207, “Square & Rectangular Die-Size, Ball Grid Array Family,” JEDEC Solid State Product Outline, Dec. 10, 22 pgs. |
Declaration of Julie Carlson re JEDEC Standard No. 79-3C, DDR3 SDRAM, JESD79-3C (Revision of JESD79-3B, Apr. 2008), dated Sep. 16, 2021, 7 pgs. |
Cho et al., “A 1.2V 64Gb 341GB/s HBM2 Stacked DRAM with Spiral Point-to-Point TSV Structure and Improved Bank Group Data Control,” IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference, ISSCC 2018 / Session 12 / DRAM / 12.3, Article No. 978-1-5090-4940-0/18, 2018, 3pgs. |
Jacob, Bruce, et al. “Memory Systems—Cache, DRAM, Disk,” Elsevier Inc. 2008, 296 pgs. (uploaded in three parts). |
Bruce L. Jacob, “Synchronous DRAM Architectures, Organizations, and Alternative Technologies”, Electrical & Computer Engineering Dept., University of Maryland, MD 20742, Dec. 10, 2002, URL: http://www.ece.umd.edu/˜blj/. |
Stephen Brown and Zvonko Vranesic, “Fundamentals of Digital Logic with Verilog Design,” 2nd Edition, Chapter 3, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Toronto, 2008, McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 10 pgs. |
Harold S. Stone, “Microcomputer Interfacing,” University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1982, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc. 399 pgs. (uploaded in three parts). |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01427, Patent Owner Response, filed Jul. 27, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01428, Patent Owner Response, filed Jul. 27, 2023. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2023, “Declaration of Michael C. Brogioli, Ph.D. in Support of Patent Owner's Response,” Jul. 27, 2023. |
IPR2022-01428 of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Exhibit 2023, “Declaration of Michael C. Brogioli, Ph.D. in Support of Patent Owner's Response,” Jul. 27, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Case No. IPRIPR2022-01427, Petitioner's Objections to Patent Owner's Evidence Submitted with Patent Owner's Response, filed Aug. 3, 2023. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2024, USDC, Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, Case No. 2:22-cv-203-JRG-RSP, Netlist, Inc. vs. Micron Technology, Inc., et al., Transcript of Jun. 26, 2023, Videotaped Deposition of Harold Stone, Ph.D. |
IPR2022-01427 and IPR2022-01428, Exhibit 2025, Transcript of Jun. 27, 2023, Videoconference Deposition of Andrew Wolfe, Ph.D. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2027, USDC, Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, Case No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, Netlist, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, et al., Jury Trial Day 1—Apr. 14, 2023. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2028, USDC, Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, Case No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, Netlist, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, et al., Trial Transcript—vol. 3 Apr. 18, 2023 excerpt. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2029, USDC, Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, Case No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, Netlist, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, et al., Trial Transcript—vol. 4—Apr. 19, 2023 excerpt. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2030, USDC, Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, Case No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, Netlist, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, et al., Robins Direct Testimony Demonstratives. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2031, USDC, Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, Case No. 2:21-CV-463-JRG, Netlist, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, et al., Milton Direct PDX2 Demonstratives—excerpts. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2032, Netlist Presentation on U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, undated. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2036, JEDEC, “Next Big Thing: DDR4 3DS,” Server Forum 2014. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2037, SK hynix Newsroom, “Continuing to Make HBM History: The Story of SK hynix's HBM Development,” Sep. 8, 2022. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2039, Steve, “Building an SRAM Substitute,” Sep. 4, 2015. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2040, Data Centers, “How Long Des NAND Flash Memory Last,” Dec. 19, 2008. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2041, Lucas Mearian, “Micron boosts NAND flash endurance six-fold,” Computer World, Oct. 19, 2009. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2043, Micron, “2, 4, 8Gb: x8/x16 Multiplexed NAND Flash Memory Features,” @2004 Micron Technology, Inc. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2044, STMicroelectronics, M48Z512A M48Z512AY, M48Z512AV, 4 Mbit (512 Kbit x 8) Zeropower® SRAM, Jun. 2011. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2045, Everspin Technologies, MR4A08B, 2Mx8RAM Memory, Mar. 2018. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2046, “3DS Technology,” @ 2023 Impress Corporation. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2047, Neil H. E. Weste et al., “CMOS VLSI Design—A Circuits and Systems Perspective,” 4th Ed. © 2011, 2005, 1993, 1985 Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Addison-Wesley. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2048, Ji-Young Kim et al. “An Energy-Efficient Design of TSV I/O for HBM With a Data Rate up to 10 Gb/s,” IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, 2023. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2049, NangateOpenCellLibrary_typical, Feb. 17, 2011. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2050, “Principles of VLSI Design—Capacitance and Resistance Model”, CMPE 413, UMBC, undated. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2051, Kyomin Sohn et al., “A 1.2 V 20 nm 307 GB/s HBM DRAM With At-Speed Wafer-Level IO Test Scheme and Adaptive Refresh Considering Temperature Distribution,” IEEE 2016. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2052, Jim Cooke, EDN, “Flash memory 101: An introduction to NAND flash,” Mar. 20, 2006. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2053, ECE UNM, “Hardware Design with VHDL Design Example: SRAM,” Dec. 3, 2008. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2054, Donghyuk Lee, et al. “Simultaneous Multi-Layer Access: Improving 3D-Stacked Memory Bandwidth at Low Cost,” ACM Transactions on Architecture and Code Optimization, vol. 12, No. 4, Article 63, Publication date: Dec. 2015. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2055, Tech Blog, “High Bandwidth Memory is Catching on for Data-Intensive Computer,” May 21, 2018. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2100, FIG. 3 of US Patent Publication No. 20110103156. |
IPR2022-01427 of U.S. Pat. No. 9,318,160, Exhibit 2101, Jin Hee Cho, et al., “A 1.2V 64Gb 341GB/s HBM2 Stacked DRAM with Spiral Point-to-Point TSV Structure and Improved Bank Group Data Control,” 2018 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 10,949,339, Case No. IPR2022-00639, Petitioner's Authorized Reply to Patent Owner's Preliminary Response, filed Aug. 26, 2022. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 10,949,339, Case No. IPR2022-00639, Petitioner's Reply to Patent Owner's Response, filed May 1, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 10,949,339, Case No. IPR2022-00639, EX2015—Subramanian Supplemental Declaration IPR2022-00063, filed Jan. 26, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPR2022-01428, Brogioli Deposition, Sep. 27, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPR2022-01428, EX1063—Dictionary Deposition for “electrical”, filed Oct. 19, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPR2022-01428, EX1064—Dictionary Deposition for “communication”, filed Oct. 19, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPR2022-01428, Petitioner's Reply to Patent Owner Response, filed Oct. 19, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPR2022-01428, Patent Owner's Sur Reply, filed Nov. 21, 2023. |
USDC for Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, Civil Action No. 2:22-CV-00203-JRG-RSP, Claim Construction Order, issued Oct. 21, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPR2022-01428, Exhibit 1053—Netlist's Technology Tutorial, filed Oct. 19, 2023. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPR2022-01428, Hearing Transcript, Feb. 5, 2024. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPR2022-01428, Patent Owner's Corrected Objections to Petitioner's Demonstratives, filed Jan. 9, 2024. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPR2022-01428, Petitioner's Demonstratives for Oral Arguments, filed Jan. 8, 2024. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPR2022-01428, Petitioner's Objections to Patent Owner's Demonstratives, filed Jan. 8, 2024. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPR2022-01428, Netlist's Demonstratives, filed Jan. 8, 2024. |
USDC Eastern District of Texas Marshall Division, Civil Action No. 2:22-cv-203-JRG-RSP, Netlist, Inc. v. Micron Technology, Inc et al., Report & Recommendation, filed Jan. 11, 2024. |
Yiran Li, et al., Exploiting Three-Dimensional (3D) Memory Stacking to Improve Image Data Access Efficiency for Motion Estimation Accelerators, Preprint submitted to Signal Processing: Image Communication, Mar. 31, 2010. |
Li Jiang, et al., Modeling TSV Open Defects in 3D-Stacked DRAM, IEEE International Test Conference, Paper 6.1, 2010. |
Xiaoxia Wu, Design Exploration for Three-dimensional Integrated Circuits (3D ICs), Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation, Oct. 25, 2010, pp. 30-32. |
Paul Falkenstern, Electronic Design Automation Challenges in Three Dimensional Integrated Chips (3D ICs), Master of Science Master Thesis, Nov. 11, 2008, pp. 1-2. |
R. Colin Johnson, Multidimensional Efforts Push Toward 3-D Chips, Electronic Engineering Times, Oct. 10, 2011, pp. 26-32. |
Rakesh Anigundi, et al., Architecture Design Exploration of Three-Dimensional (3D) Integrated DRAM, 10th International Symposium on Quality Electronic Design, 2009. |
Katsuyuki Sakuma, et al., 3D Chip-Stacking Technology With Through-Silicon Vias And Low-Volume Lead-free Interconnections, IBM Journal of Research and Development vol. 52 No. 6, Nov. 2008, pp. 611-622. |
Qi Wu, et al., Impacts of Though-DRAM Vias in 3D Processor-DRAM Integrated Systems, 2009. |
Wangyuan Zhang, et al., Exploring Phase Change Memory and 3D Die-Stacking for Power/Thermal Friendly, Fast and Durable Memory Architectures, 2009 18th International Conference on Parallel Architectures and Compilation Techniques, 2009. |
Christian Weis, et al., Design Space Exploration for 3D-stacked DRAMs, 2011 Design, Automation & Test in Europe, 2011. |
Ang-Chih Hsieh, et al., TSV Redundancy: Architecture and Design Issues in 3D IC, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems, 2011. |
John U. Knickerbocker, et al., Three-Dimensional Silicon Integration, IBM Journal of Research and Development vol. 52 No. 6, Nov. 2008, pp. 553-569. |
Yung-Fa Chou, et al., Yield Enhancement by Bad-Die Recycling and Stacking With Though-Silicon Vias, IEEE Transactions On Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems, vol. 19, No. 8, Aug. 2011, pp. 1346-1356. |
Igor Loi, et al., An Efficient Distributed Memory Interface For Many-Core Platform With 3D Stacked DRAM, 2010 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition, 2010. |
Jung-Sik Kim, et al., A 1.2 v 12.8 GB/s 2 Gb mobile wide-I/O DRAM with 4 × 128 I/Os using TSV Based Stacking, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits vol. 47 No. 1, Jan. 2012, pp. 107-116. |
USDC Easter District of Texas, Marshall Division, Netlist, Inc. v. Micron Technology, Inc et al., Civil Action No. 2:22-CV-00203-JRG-RSP, Claim Construction Order, Filed Oct. 22, 2023, 45 pages. |
Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,787,060, Case No. IPR2022-01428, Final Written Decision, Apr. 1, 2024. |
Marco Facchini et al., “System-level power/performance evaluation of 3D stacked DRAMs for mobile applications, ”2009 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition, Apr. 24, 2009. |
X. Zhao et al., “Low-Power Clock Tree Design for Pre-Bond Testing of 3-D Stacked ICs,” IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, vol. 30, Issue 5, Apr. 19, 2011. |
Q. Wu et al., “Impacts of though-DRAM vias in 3D processor-DRAM integrated systems,” 2009 IEEE International Conference on 3D System Integration, Sep. 30, 2009. |
W. Ahmad et al., “Peak-to-Peak Ground Noise on a Power Distribution TSV Pair as a Function of Rise Time in 3-D Stack of Dies Interconnected Through TSVs,” IEEE Transactions on Components, Packaging and Manufacturing Technology (vol. 1, Issue: 2, Feb. 2011). |
R. Anigundi et al. “Architecture design exploration of three dimensional (3D) integrated DRAM,” 2009 10th International Symposium on Quality Electronic Design, Mar. 18, 2009. |
Tak-Yung Kim et al., “Clock tree synthesis with pre-bond testability for 3D stacked IC Designs,” IEEE Design Automation Conference, Jun. 18, 2010. |
Uksong Kang et al., “8 Gb 3-D DDR3 DRAM Using Through-Silicon-Via Technology,” IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 45, No. 1, Jan. 2010. |
Yi Zhao et al., “Cost-Effective TSV Grouping for Yield Improvement of 3D-ICs,” retrieved from the Internet at: https://typeset.io/pdf/cost-effective-tsv-grouping-for-yield-improvement-of-3d-ics-5gm5xcx0iq.pdf, undated. |
Ka Yao Tong et al., “A System Level Implementation of Rijndael on a Memory-slot based FPGA Card,” retrieved from https://phwl.org/assets/papers/aes_fpt02.pdf, Jan. 2003. |
Christian Plessl et al., “TKDM—A Reconfigurable Co-processor in a PC's Memory Slot,” retrieved from from: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=615235db2bed5bb4823f9c3a9d383a92e1f602c7, Dec. 17, 2003. |
Maxim Integrated, “DC-DC Converter Tutorial,” retrieved from https://pdfserv.maximintegrated.com/en/an/DCDC_Converter_Tutorial.pdf, Nov. 29, 2001. |
Renesas Datasheet, ISL6537, “ACPI Regulator/Controller for Dual Channel DDR Memory Systems,” Jul. 18, 2007. |
Renesas Datasheet, ISL6534, “Dual PWM with Linear,” Nov. 18, 2005. |
Intersil Datasheet, ISL6532B, “ACPI Regulator/Controller for Dual Channel DDR Memory Systems,” Jul. 18, 2004. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20220208233 A1 | Jun 2022 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61409893 | Nov 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 17157903 | Jan 2021 | US |
Child | 17694649 | US | |
Parent | 16412308 | May 2019 | US |
Child | 17157903 | US | |
Parent | 15602099 | May 2017 | US |
Child | 16412308 | US | |
Parent | 15095288 | Apr 2016 | US |
Child | 15602099 | US | |
Parent | 14337168 | Jul 2014 | US |
Child | 15095288 | US | |
Parent | 13288850 | Nov 2011 | US |
Child | 14337168 | US |