Case3:10-cv-05449-RS Document92-3 Filed06/01/12 Page1 of 9

Appendix B-2

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Document92-3 Filed06/01/12 Page2 of 9 DEFENDANTS' PROPOSED
DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION Ordinary, plain meaning; no construction required.

CLAIM TERM address information

INTRINSIC EVIDENCE * See, e.g., '916 patent at Figs. 1, 4, 6, 1:38-1:40, 1:61-2:6, 3:37-41, 4:2-6, 5:47-54, 6:58-67, 7:52-8:1, 8:29-35, 8:65-9:3, 9:31-44, 11:1417, 12:19-31, Claim 5; Alternatively, "information used to See, e.g., '997 patent at Claim 12; see, e.g., '037 patent at Claim specify any part of a storage 35; location" See, e.g., US. Pat. No. 6,975,558 at Claims 31, 41; see, e.g., US. Pat. No. 6,728,819 at Claims 1, 29;

EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE * Definition for "address" in IEEE Dictionary; See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy In Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Oct. 27, 2003), Reply Decl. of Robert J. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Nov. 17, 2003); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007);

array of memory cells

Ordinary, plain meaning; no construction required.

See, e.g., '916 patent at Figs. 1, 3, 9, 15, 1:32-65, 7:20- 41, 21:3840, 23:50-24:64, Claim 5; See, e.g., '696 patent at Claim 52; see, e.g., '281 patent at Claim 26; See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,638,334 at Claims 1, 3; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,841,715 at Claim 1; 6513081 at Claims 33, 34; see, e.g., U.S. App. No. 10/973,268 at Claims 153, 170, 180; See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 90/010,420, Supp. Decl. of Robert J. Murphy (Feb. 10, 2010); See, e.g., '916 patent at Fig. 4, 7:42-46, 11:30-12:7, Claim 13, 25,

See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy In Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Oct. 27, 2003), Reply Decl. of Robert J. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Nov. 17, 2003); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007);

binary code

Ordinary, plain meaning; no construction required. Alternatively, "one or more bits representing information"

See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy In Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Oct. 27, 2003), Reply See, e.g., '020 patent at Claim 13; see, e.g., '997 patent at Claims Decl. of Robert J. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply Claim 1, 17, 19, 31, 35, 38; Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Nov. 17, 2003); See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,032,215 at Claim 14; see, e.g., U.S. See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Pat. No. 6,032,214 at Claims 6, 21, 31; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. 6,085,284 at Claims 15, 32; of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 90/010,420, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007); (Oct. 26, 2009); 39;

Page 1 of 8

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Document92-3 Filed06/01/12 Page3 of 9 DEFENDANTS' PROPOSED
DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION INTRINSIC EVIDENCE * information that specifies the total See, e.g., citations herein for "binary code"; amount of data that is to be See, e.g., '916 patent at Fig. 4, 7:42-46, 11:44-67; transferred on the bus in See, e.g., '997 patent at Claims 1, 17, 19, 31, 35, 38; response to a read request, write See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 90/010,420, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy request, or operation code (Oct. 26, 2009);

CLAIM TERM block size value

EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE * See, e.g., citations herein for "binary code"; See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,166, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132 (Aug. 17, 2009); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy In Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Oct. 27, 2003), Reply Decl. of Robert J. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Nov. 17, 2003); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007);

clock cycle

Ordinary, plain meaning; no construction required.

See, e.g., '916 patent at Figs. 4-6, 13, 14, 8:40-47, 8:65 - 9:3, 15:32-57, 16:1-15, 19:1-50; See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,035,365 at Claims 12, 33; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,953,263 at Claim 15; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,809,263 at Claim 28;

See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy In Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Oct. 27, 2003), Reply Decl. of Robert J. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Nov. 17, 2003); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007);

clock signal

a periodic signal that is See, e.g., citations herein for "external clock signal"; See, e.g., '916 patent at Figs. 2, 14, 4:27-43, 8:35-36, 19:1-50, continuously present and repeats 21:49-22:7, 22:57-23:49; at regular intervals to provide timing information See, e.g., '918 patent at Claim 31; See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 90/010,420, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy (Oct. 26, 2009), Supp. Decl. of Robert J. Murphy (Feb. 10, 2010); See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,188, Office Action (Dec. 18, 2009), Office Action (Aug. 6, 2010), Action Closing Prosecution (Nov. 24, 2010), Action Closing Prosecution (Apr. 4, 2011), Patent Owner's Response to Office Action (May 4, 2011); See, e.g., Inter Partes Rambus, Inc. v. Samsung Elec. Co. et al., Appeal No. 2011-008431, BPAI Decision on Appeal (Jan. 19, 2012); See, e.g., U.S. Patent No. 6,266,285 at Claim 4;

See, e.g., citations herein for "external clock signal"; Definition for "clock" in IEEE Dictionary and IDE; See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,169, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132 (Sep. 4, 2009); See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,166, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132 (Aug. 17, 2009); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy In Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Oct. 27, 2003), Reply Decl. of Robert J. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Nov. 17, 2003); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007);

Page 2 of 8

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Document92-3 Filed06/01/12 Page4 of 9 DEFENDANTS' PROPOSED
DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION INTRINSIC EVIDENCE * EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE * Definition for "device" in IEEE Dictionary; a device that controls one or more See, e.g., '916 patent at 6:16-31, 6:58-65, 7:12-15, 7:8:4-14, See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,169, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy devices 12:52-65, 14:54-15:5, 16:16-25, 19:66-20:67, Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132 (Sep. 4, 2009); See, e.g., '918 patent at Claims 18-21; See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,166, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 07/510,898, original claims 7, 25, 47, 51, Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132 (Aug. 17, 2009); 62, 91, 143; See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 10/716,596, Response to Office Action (Sep. 26, 2009); See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 90/010,420, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy (Oct. 26, 2009), Supp. Decl. of Robert J. Murphy (Feb. 10, 2010); See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,188, Office Action (Dec. 18, 2009), Office Action (Aug. 6, 2010), Action Closing Prosecution (Nov. 24, 2010), Action Closing Prosecution (Apr. 4, 2011), Patent Owner's Response to Office Action (May 4, 2011); See, e.g., Rambus, Inc. v. Samsung Elec. Co. et al., Appeal No. 2011-008431, BPAI Decision on Appeal (Jan. 19, 2012); see, e.g., Rambus, Inc. v. Samsung Elec. Co. et al., Appeal No. 2011-009664, BPAI Decision on Appeal (Jan. 19, 2012); see, e.g., Rambus, Inc. v. Samsung Elec. Co. et al., Appeal No. 2012-000168, BPAI Decision on Appeal (Apr. 24, 2012); see, e.g., Rambus, Inc. v. Samsung Elec. Co. et al., Appeal No. 2012-000169, BPAI Decision on Appeal (Apr. 24, 2012); See, e.g., '916 patent at Figs. 2, 14, 4:27-43, 8:35-36, 19:1-50, a periodic signal that is continuously present and repeats 21:49-22:7, 22:57-23:49; See, e.g., '918 patent at Claim 31; at regular intervals to provide See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 90/010,420, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy timing information from a source (Oct. 26, 2009), Supp. Decl. of Robert J. Murphy (Feb. 10, 2010); external to the device See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,188, Office Action (Dec. 18, 2009), Office Action (Aug. 6, 2010), Action Closing Prosecution (Nov. 24, 2010), Action Closing Prosecution (Apr. 4, 2011), Patent Owner's Response to Office Action (May 4, 2011); See, e.g., Inter Partes Rambus, Inc. v. Samsung Elec. Co. et al., Appeal No. 2011-008431, BPAI Decision on Appeal (Jan. 19, 2012); See, e.g., U.S. Patent No. 6,266,285 at Claim 4; Definition for "clock" in IEEE Dictionary and IDE; See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,169, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132 (Sep. 4, 2009); See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,166, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132 (Aug. 17, 2009); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy In Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Oct. 27, 2003), Reply Decl. of Robert J. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Nov. 17, 2003); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007);

CLAIM TERM controller / controller device

external clock signal

in response to

Ordinary, plain meaning; no construction required.

See, e.g., citations herein for "operation code"; See, e.g., '916 patent at Abstract, 6:67-7:9, 8:49-58, 9:54-10:5, 12:9-12, 16:7-10; See, e.g., citations herein for "controller / controller device;"

See, e.g., citations herein for "operation code"

integrated circuit controller device

a device constructed of one or more integrated circuits that controls the actions of one or more devices

See, e.g., citations herein for "controller / controller device;"

Page 3 of 8

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Document92-3 Filed06/01/12 Page5 of 9 DEFENDANTS' PROPOSED
DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION INTRINSIC EVIDENCE * a device in which data can be See, e.g., '916 patent at Abstract, Figs. 1, 2, 1:31-57, 2:37-44, stored and retrieved electronically 3:23-28, 3:46-4:2, 4:9-21, 4:60-61, 5:33-39, 5:62-67, 6:16-35, 7:2361, 12:3-7, 19:59-20:20, 21:38-40; See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 07/510,898, original claims 13, 26, 91; See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 09/161,099, Preliminary Amendment (Sep. 25, 1998); See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 90/010,420, Office Action (Dec. 11, 2009), Decl. of Robert J. Murphy (Oct. 26, 2009), Supp. Decl. of Robert J. Murphy (Feb. 10, 2010); Ex parte Rambus, Appeal No. 2010-011178, BPAI Decision on Appeal (Jan. 12, 2011); See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,134, Response to Office Action (Aug. 14, 2009); See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,188, Office Action (Dec. 18, 2009), Office Action (Aug. 6, 2010), Action Closing Prosecution (Nov. 24, 2010), Action Closing Prosecution (Apr. 4, 2011), Patent Owner's Response to Office Action (May 4, 2011); See, e.g., Rambus, Inc. v. Samsung Elec. Co. et al., Appeal No. 2011-008431, BPAI Decision on Appeal (Jan. 19, 2012); see, e.g., Rambus, Inc. v. Samsung Elec. Co. et al., Appeal No. 2012-000168, BPAI Decision on Appeal (Apr. 24, 2012); see, e.g., Rambus, Inc. v. Samsung Elec. Co. et al., Appeal No. 2012-000169, BPAI Decision on Appeal (Apr. 24, 2012); see, e.g., Rambus, Inc. v. Samsung Elec. Co. et al., Appeal No. 2011-009664, BPAI Decision on Appeal (Jan. 19, 2012); See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,657,481 at claims 1, 2, 8; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,841,715 at claims 1, 2; See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,112, Office Action (Mar. 20, 2009), Patent Owner's Response (Jun. 22, 2009), Supp. Decl. of R. Murphy (Jun. 22, 2009);

CLAIM TERM memory device

EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE * Definitions for "memory," "storage," "storage medium," and "device" from IEEE Dictionary; Definitions for "memory" and "device" from IDE; See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,169, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132 (Sep. 4, 2009); See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,166, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132 (Aug. 17, 2009); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy In Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Oct. 27, 2003), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Nov. 17, 2003); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007);

operation code

one or more control bits to specify See, e.g., '916 patent at Fig. 4, 3:37-41, 3:52-62, 4:3-6, 4:11-13, a type of action 5:33-54, 6:20-21, 6:58-65, 8:65-9:1, 9:30-10:5; See, e.g., '937 patent at Claims 10-12, 17, 25, and 40; See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 09/669,295, Amendment (Apr. 20, 2001); See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 09/796,206, Amendment (May 22, 2001), Office Action (Sep. 28, 2001), Response to Office Action (Sep. 28, 2001); See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 09/629,427, Response to Office Action (May 3, 2001); See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 07/510,898, original claims 30, 128; See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 90/010,420, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy (Oct. 26, 2009);

Definitions for "operation code" in IEEE Dictionary and IDE; See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy In Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Oct. 27, 2003), Reply Decl. of Robert J. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Nov. 17, 2003); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007);

Page 4 of 8

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Document92-3 Filed06/01/12 Page6 of 9 DEFENDANTS' PROPOSED
DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION Ordinary, plain meaning; no construction required.

CLAIM TERM precharge information

Alternatively, "information denoting whether the sense amplifiers and/or bit lines (or a portion of the sense amplifiers and/or bit lines) should be precharged" precharged automatically precharged without additional instruction

INTRINSIC EVIDENCE * EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE * See, e.g., '916 patent at 10:22-64, 11:15-43, 23:51-65; See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy In Support of Rambus's Opening See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 09/969,489, Office Action (Mar. 1, 2002), Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Oct. 27, 2003), Reply Response to Office Action (Mar. 21, 2002); Decl. of Robert J. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Nov. 17, 2003); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007); See, e.g., '916 patent at 10:22-64, 11:15-43, 23:51-65; See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 09/969,489, Office Action (Mar. 1, 2002), Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. Response to Office Action (Mar. 21, 2002); of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007); See, e.g., citations herein for "register"; See, e.g., '916 patent at Fig. 16, 6:31-57, 9:14-16, 9:64-10:21, 15:6-16:25 See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,928,343 at Claims 24; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,953,263 at Claims 3-5, 16-17, 27; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,085,284 at Claims 7; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,415,339 at Claim 67, 15; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,378,020 at Claim 41; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,696 at Claims 1, 13, 26, 36, 48; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,697,295 at Claims 1, 16, 31, 46, 51; See, e.g., citations herein for "register";

programmable register

Ordinary, plain meaning; no construction required. Alternatively, "a register whose contents can be programmed"

read operation

Ordinary, plain meaning; no construction required

See, e.g., '916 patent at 1:46-47, 9:54-57, 10:31-34; See, e.g., '020 patent at Claims 2, 32, 37, 38; '997 patent at Claims 1, 19, 32, 35, 38; '696 patent at Claim 48; see, e.g., '281 patent at Claim 22; See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 07/510,898, original claims 31, 32, 37; See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,841,580 at Claims 3, 8; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,101,152 at Claims 1, 18; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,807,598 at Claims 3, 9, 23, 29; See, e.g., '916 patent at Fig. 16, 6:31-57, 9:14-16, 9:64-10:21, 15:6-16:25 See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 07/510,898, original claim 16; See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,606,717 at Claims 3-4; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,809,263 at Claims 42-45; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,928,343 at Claims 20-22; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,841,580 at Claim 3, 8, 15; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,983,320 at Claim 11; see, e.g., U.S. App. No. 10/973,268 at Claims 151, 163, 174;

See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy In Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Oct. 27, 2003), Reply Decl. of Robert J. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Nov. 17, 2003); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007); Definition for "register" in IEEE Dictionary;

register

a storage element that can store information

Page 5 of 8

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Document92-3 Filed06/01/12 Page7 of 9 DEFENDANTS' PROPOSED
DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION Ordinary, plain meaning; no construction required.

CLAIM TERM representative of

INTRINSIC EVIDENCE * EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE * See, e.g., '916 patent at 9:54-10:21, 11:30-47, Claims 1, 4, 14-16, 26; See, e.g., '918 patent at Claims 8, 34; see, e.g., '195 patent at Claims 6, 16, 23; see, e.g., '097 patent at Claim 6; see, e.g., '937 patent at Claims 5, 24; see, e.g., '916 patent at Claim 15; see, e.g., '281 patent at Claim 43; see, e.g., '037 patent at Claim 28; See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,035,365 at Claim 43; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,953,263 at Claim 8; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,101,152 at Claim 2; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,032,214 at Claim 4; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,697,295 at Claim 8;

sample(s) / sampled / sampling

capture(s) / captured / capturing

See, e.g., '916 patent at 19:36-38, 21:58-62, 22:28-63, 23:11-14, 23:34-49;

See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,169, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132 (Sep. 4, 2009); See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,166, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132 (Aug. 17, 2009); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007); See, e.g., In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Chips, Hearing Transcript, Vol. 2 at 831:18-834:15, Inv. No. 337-TA-753 (Oct. 13, 2011); see, e.g., In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Chips, Depo. Transcript of S. Przybylski at 89:10-90:2, Inv. No. 337-TA-753 (Aug. 18, 2011); see, e.g., In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Chips, Depo. Transcript of S. Przybylski at 314:13-316:1, Inv. No. 337-TA753 (Aug. 19, 2011); see, e.g., In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Chips, Initial Determination of Section 337, Inv. No. 337-TA-753 at 91-92, 99-100, 111-12, 218, 223, 234-37 (Mar. 2, 2012); See, e.g., In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Chips Having Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory Controllers, Initial Determination on Violation of Section 337, Inv. No. 337-TA-661 at 2526 (Jan. 22, 2010); see, e.g., In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Chips Having Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory Controllers, Commission Opinion, Inv. No. 337-TA-661 (Aug. 10, 2010); See, e.g., citations herein for "synchronous memory device;"

synchronous dynamic random access memory device

a dynamic random access memory device in which an external clock signal is used to regulate the timing of device operations

See, e.g., citations herein for "synchronous memory device;" See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,324,120 at Claim 26;

Page 6 of 8

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Document92-3 Filed06/01/12 Page8 of 9 DEFENDANTS' PROPOSED
DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION a memory device in which an external clock signal is used to regulate the timing of device operations

CLAIM TERM synchronous memory device

INTRINSIC EVIDENCE * See, e.g., citations herein for "external clock signal" and "memory device;" See, e.g., '916 patent at 1:50-2:6, 2:45-51, 3:63-4:57, 6:1-42, 10:22-12:50, 17:21-51, 23:51-24:64, See, e.g., '918 patent at Claims 18, 34, U.S. App. No. 09/252.997, Information Disclosure Citation citing U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,916,670 to Suzuki and 5,077,693 to Hardee (Mar 22, 1999), Information Disclosure Statement citing U.S. Pat. No. 5,206,833 to Lee (June 11, 1999); see, e.g., '097 patent at Claims 7, 34; see, e.g., '696 patent at Claim 1; see, e.g., '281 patent at Claim 16, U.S. App. No. 09/969,489, Information Discloure Statement citing U.S. Pat. No. 4,631,659 to Hayn (Dec. 21, 2001); see, e.g., '037 patent at Claim 1; see, e.g., '937 patent, U.S. App. No. 09/669,295, Amendment at 1112 (Apr. 20, 2001) citing Markman Order in Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Techs. AG, Case No. 00-cv-524 (Mar. 17, 2004); '195 patent, U.S. App. No. 09/196,199, Information Disclosure Citation citing U.S. Pat. No. 5,077,693 to Hardee (Mar. 26, 1999); See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,598,171 at Claim 1; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,915,105 at Claims 24, 36; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,954,804 at Claim 4; see, e.g., U.S. Pat.No. 6,035,365 at Claim 1; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,049,846 at Claims 1, 14; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,032,215 at Claims 1, 17, 27; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,995,443 at Claims 1, 21, 29; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,101,152 at Claim 11; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,070,222 at Claims 1, 16, 28; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,128,696 at Claims 1, 37; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,415,339 at Claim 12; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,324,120 at Claim 1; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,697,295 at Claim 31;

EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE * See, e.g., citations herein for "external clock signal" and "memory device;" Definitions for "synchronization" and "synchronous device" from IEEE Dictionary; Definitions for "synchronous" and "synchronizing signal" from IDE; See, e.g., Reex. App. No. 95/001,169, Decl. of Robert J. Murphy Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132 (Sep. 4, 2009);

Page 7 of 8

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Document92-3 Filed06/01/12 Page9 of 9 DEFENDANTS' PROPOSED
DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION operating in step (or in phase) with respect to

CLAIM TERM synchronously with respect to

INTRINSIC EVIDENCE * See, e.g., citations herein for "synchronous memory device;" See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 07/510,898, original claims 79, 108; See, e.g., U.S. App. No. 09/510,213, Response to Office Action (Aug. 31, 2000); See, e.g., citations herein for "read operation;" See, e.g., '916 patent at 1:46-47, 9:54-57, 10:31-34; See, e.g., '020 patent at Claim 34; '997 patent at Claim 9, 26, 34, 37; '696 patent at Claim 8; see, e.g., '037 patent at Claim 27; see, e.g., '997 patent at Claim 37; See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,638,334 at Claim 1; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,841,715 at Claim 1; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,266,285 at Claims 18, 33; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,975,558 at Claim 1; see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 7,110,322 at Claims 20, 21; see, e.g., U.S. App. No. 10/716,595 at Claim 41;

EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE * See, e.g., citations herein for "synchronous memory device;"

write operation

Ordinary, plain meaning; no construction required

See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy In Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Oct. 27, 2003), Reply Decl. of Robert J. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply Claim Construction Br., Case No. 00-cv-20905 (Nov. 17, 2003); See, e.g., Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Opening Claim Constr. Br., Case No. 05-cv-334 (Aug. 24, 2007), Reply Decl. of R. Murphy in Support of Rambus's Reply to Mfg.'s Resp. Br. on Claim Constr. (Sep. 28, 2007);

* In addition to the intrinsic and extrinsic evidence identfied above for each of the terms, Defendants identify as intrinsic evidence the asserted claim(s) in which the term appears. Defendants may also rely on any intrinsic or extrinsic evidence identified by Rambus in support of its proposed constructions. Defendants may also rely on additional intrinsic and extrinsic evidence, including but not limited to additional documents from prior litigations to which Rambus was a party, the prosecution history of the patents-in-suit, and/or any reexaminations, the prosecution history of any patent or patent application claiming priority to U.S. App. No. 07/510,898, and/or any reexaminations, to rebut proposed constructions and/or arguments made by Rambus. In addition, Defendants may introduce the expert testimony of Dr. Bruce L. Jacob and/or Dr. Alan J. Smith. Drs. Jacob and/or Smith may testify as to the art to which the patents-in-suit pertain, the level of education, knowledge, or skill a person of ordinary skill in the art would have at the time of the alleged inventions, and background on the technology described in the patents-in-suit. Drs. Jacob and/or Smith may also testify that a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand, in light of the specification of the patents-in-suit, the meaning of the claim terms identified above to be consistent with any proposed construction contained therein. Drs. Jacob and/or Smith may also respond to or rebut any testimony from any witness appearing on behalf of Rambus.

Page 8 of 8