`571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper No. 49
`Entered: June 30, 2015
`
`RECORD OF ORAL HEARING
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`- - - - - -
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`- - - - - -
`
`THE GILLETTE COMPANY and
`FUJITSU SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`ZOND, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`- - - - - - -
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`Technology Center 1700
`
`- - - - - - -
`
`Oral Hearing Held on Tuesday, May 26, 2015
`
`- - - - - - -
`
`
`
`Before: JONI Y. CHANG, SUSAN MITCHELL, JENNIFER
`MEYER, DEBRA STEPHENS (via video link), and KEVIN TURNER (via
`video link), Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`The above-entitled matter came on for hearing on Tuesday, May 26,
`2015, at 1:05 p.m., in Hearing Room A, taken at the U.S. Patent and
`Trademark Office, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia.
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER GILLETTE:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DAVID L. CAVANAUGH, ESQ.
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
`1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20006
`202-663-6025
`
`YUNG-HOON (Sam) HA, Ph.D., ESQ.
`COSMIN MAIER, ESQ.
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
`7 World Trade Center
`250 Greenwich Street
`New York, New York 10007
`212-230-8800
`
`ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER FUJITSU:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DAVID M. O'DELL, ESQ.
`GREGORY HUH, ESQ.
`Haynes and Boone LLP
`2505 North Plano Road, Suite 4000
`Richardson, Texas 75082-4101
`972-739-6900
`
`ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER FUJITSU:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DAVID L. McCOMBS, ESQ.
`Haynes and Boone, LLP
`2323 Victory Avenue, Suite 700
`Dallas, Texas 75219
`214-651-5533
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PATENT OWNER:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TAREK N. FAHMI, ESQ.
`Ascenda Law Group
`333 West San Carlos Street, Suite 200
`San Jose, California 95110-2730
`408-389-3537
`
`BRUCE J. BARKER, ESQ.
`Chao Hadidi Stark & Barker LLP
`176 East Main Street, Suite 6
`Westborough, Massachusetts 01581
`508-366-3800
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`P R O C E E D I N G S
`
`(1:05 p. m.)
`
`JUDGE C HANG: Please be se ated. This is the
`
`hearing for cases IPR2014 -00578 and IPR2014 -00604
`
`involving patent 6,896,775.
`
`And the Boa rd in stituted these two Inter Partes
`
`Reviews on Octo ber 15th, 2014. S ubsequent to the inst itution
`
`the Board granted a joint motion in each case joining both
`
`IPR2014 -01494 and IPR2014 -01482. This is a co mb ined oral
`
`hearing. The tran script for this ora l hearing will be entered in
`
`each of the joint proceedings.
`
`And consistent wi th the Board's pre vious order,
`
`each part y has one hour ea ch. And Petitioner will pr oceed
`
`first to present its case as to the ch allenged clai ms , and the
`
`Petitioner ma y re serve rebuttal ti me, and therea fter t he Patent
`
`Owne r will respo nd to the Petitioner's case.
`
`At this ti me I wo uld like the counsel to introduce
`
`yourselves and yo ur colleagues, be ginning with the Petitioner.
`
`MR. CAVANAUGH: This is Davi d Cavanaugh. I
`
`represent Gillette. With me is Sa m Ha , also repr esenting
`
`Gillette with Wil me r Hale . Also with me is C os mi n Maier ,
`
`who is with Wil mer Hale representi ng Gillette.
`
`The other Petitioners over her e, David O' Dell is
`
`with Ha ynes and Boone representi ng Fujitsu, David McCo mbs
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`also with Ha yn es and Boone repres enting Fujitsu, an d Gregor y
`
`Huh repres enting Fujitsu.
`
`JUDGE C HANG: Thank you.
`
`MR. FAHM I: Go od afternoon, Yo ur Honors.
`
`Tarek Fah mi on b ehalf of the Pat ent Owner . With me is B ruce
`
`Barker .
`
`JUDGE C HANG: Thank you. Counsel, do you
`
`have a cop y of th e de monstratives for the court repo rter and
`
`for the Panel?
`
`MR. CAVANAUGH: Yes , we do.
`
`MR. FAHM I: Ye s.
`
`JUDGE C HANG: Oka y. Great . Thank you. You
`
`ma y proceed at a n y ti me .
`
`MR. CAVANAUGH: Thank you. Ma y it please
`
`the Board. Good afternoon. I' m D ave Cavanaugh an d with
`
`me , as I mentione d earlier , is Cos min Maier and Sa m Ha . I
`
`would like to rese rve 10 minutes fo r rebuttal and get started.
`
`So last October a s, Judge Chang, you noted, the
`
`Board instituted a trial on all of the clai ms of the '775 patent.
`
`In the decision on institution the Board credited the t esti mon y
`
`of the P etitioner's expert, Mr . De Vi to, and found that there
`
`was a r easonable likelihood that the challenged clai ms we re
`
`unpatentable based on the co mbinations of refe rences that
`
`include Wang, M ozgrin, Kudr yavts ev, and a few others for
`
`so me depend ent c lai ms .
`
`
`
`5
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`As I will explain today and b y wa y of introduction,
`
`the record suppor ts the decision on institution in which the
`
`Board deter mined that all of the cla i ms we re likel y
`
`unpatentable.
`
`Toda y I would like to provide the Board with an
`
`overview of t he ' 775 patent. I wo uld like to identify the
`
`instituted combin ations of refe renc es and focusing pri maril y
`
`on the independent clai ms and so me selected dependent
`
`clai ms .
`
`I would like to ad dress the issues r aised b y the
`
`Patent Owner in t heir response and a ddress the, agai n, the
`
`independent claims and the depen dent clai ms that t he Patent
`
`Owne r has chosen to argue .
`
`The '775 patent is related to a high -power pulsed
`
`magneticall y enhanced plas ma pro cessing apparatus and
`
`device. And whil e the title is a mo uthf ul, the technology itself
`
`can be broken do wn into its ele me ntal co mponents i n a
`
`thoughtful wa y.
`
`And here on slide 4, what I have done is to identif y
`
`on figure 2 of the '775 patent the el e ments that we wi ll be
`
`talking about toda y. The magnetic field is i n orange , which is
`
`ele ment 256.
`
`An ele ctrical puls e is applied ac ross an anode and
`
`a cathode. The a node is in yello w and the cathode i s in green.
`
`And a power suppl y is what provides the ele ctrical p ulse, and
`
`
`
`6
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`that is in light blue. And that 's on the to p right -hand part of
`
`the illustration.
`
`The plas ma is gen erated in the dotted region,
`
`which is colored purple, and that i s located between the anode
`
`and cathode, and then there is a su bstrate which is in blue and
`
`there is a bias tha t is applied to the sub strate.
`
`As I mentioned a mo ment ago, the i nvention or the
`
`'775 patent relate s to a pa rticular p rocess for generat ing
`
`highly-ionized, or plas ma that is h ighly ionized, an d I would
`
`like to walk through the process of generating that
`
`highly-ionized pl as ma s o that the Board can apprec iate what is
`
`provided in the power suppl y associated with the '7 75 patent.
`
`And, again, this p ower suppl y is what is on the
`
`right -hand side, e le ment 234 -- now I' m on slide 4 - - the
`
`right -hand side of figure 2 , labeled P/S. And the po wer
`
`supply -- no w I ' m on slide 5 - - star ts with the application of an
`
`a mount of voltage. That voltage a cross the cathode and anode
`
`ionizes the gas that is between the cathode and anode to a low
`
`level, to a low -le vel ionization.
`
`And at T2, which i s represented on the first dotted
`
`line verticall y, th ere is a voltage p ulse that is applied to the
`
`s yste m b y the power supply. And what happens is t he voltage
`
`pulse provides for an inc rease in t he ionization associated with
`
`the ionized plas ma and so it be co mes highly -ionized plas ma.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`Wh at happens wit h that highly -ionized plas ma is
`
`that it conducts electricit y differen tly so that the voltage will
`
`go down as the plas ma beco mes mo re ionized and the current
`
`goes up. And tha t's what is happening in the middle part of
`
`figure 5 in the '77 5 patent.
`
`And the power pu lse, which is on t he lower graph,
`
`rises to a certain constant level and the highly -ener gized
`
`plas ma , the highly -ionized plas ma is represented on the flat
`
`line between T5 a nd T6 and then the c ycle of a pulsed voltage
`
`would continue on again, and it re peats over ti me to cre ate the
`
`plas ma .
`
`The plas ma is use d in a va riet y of different things
`
`for etching and d eposition of ions onto a substrate or a wa y
`
`fro m a substrate. It is useful in se miconductor man uf acturing.
`
`The use of plas ma is also probabl y co mmonl y understood in
`
`neon lights and in other kinds of ill u mination.
`
`So turning fro m s lide 5 to slide 6, I put the basic
`
`ele ments of repre sentative clai m 1, which is an appa ratus
`
`clai m, and repr esentative c lai m 15, which is a method, up on
`
`the screen and identified where th ose ele ments that I
`
`previously identif ied on the figure , wher e the y are in the
`
`clai m.
`
`There is an anode. The re is a cath ode. Ther e is a
`
`magnet that gener ates a magnetic fi eld. The re i s a p ower
`
`supply that creat e s the strongl y -ionized plas ma and a bias
`
`
`
`8
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`voltage to the substrate, which I ' m not sure I mentioned it, so
`
`just in cas e I didn't, I' m back on slide 4, the substrate has a
`
`power -- has a bias that's applied b y a voltage sourc e 214 and
`
`that's in the bottom part of figure 2 on slide 4.
`
`So the Boa rd deci ded in the decision on institution
`
`that certain refer e nces we re a pa rt of a ground of
`
`unpatentability that was re asonabl y likel y to have th e clai m
`
`invalid or cancell ed. The pri ma r y r eferenc e is Wan g, Mozgrin
`
`and Kudr yavtsev. And I have outlined the m on slide 7 for the
`
`Board.
`
`And before I get t o the particular r eferences , on
`
`slide 8 I just iden tif y so me clai m c onstruction issues that the
`
`Board addressed i n the decision on institutio n and I t hink there
`
`are t wo that merit mention. One , weakl y -ionized
`
`plas ma/strongl y i onized plas ma . The Petitioner and the Patent
`
`Owne r had slightly diff erent constructions.
`
`In the Boa rd's de cision, the y said t hat there was no
`
`mate rial diff erenc e or su bstantial difference between the
`
`Petitioner and the Patent Owner's c onstruction and the y
`
`decided a particul ar construction and no one has a rgued that in
`
`this proceeding.
`
`The se cond ter m t hat I wanted to address was
`
`ionizing a feed ga s. The Petitioner di dn't request a
`
`construction of that. The P atent Owner did but the Board in
`
`the decision on institution perceived that it should re ceive its
`
`
`
`9
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`ordinar y and custo mar y meaning. And then as the B oard has
`
`required in the rules, we have put f orth constructions a nd the
`
`Board adopted co nstructions related to the
`
`me ans -plus-function li mitations in the second of the two IP Rs.
`
`So with --
`
`JUDGE TURNER : Counsel, before you move on, I
`
`have a quick ques tion.
`
`MR. CAVANAUGH: Yes .
`
`JUDGE TURNER : I understand that the P at ent
`
`Owne r hasn't disputed our construction for means for ionizing
`
`a fe ed gas or volume of the f eed ga s, but the y do see m to sa y
`
`in their response that the y think th at that me ans req uires a gap .
`
`So I know that ou r construction doesn't, you know,
`
`mention t he gap but I figure that th is might be a good point for
`
`you to perhaps -- ma ybe I' m ju mping ahead, though -- I will
`
`give you the opportunity to discuss that at this point.
`
`MR. CAVANAUGH: I think we will talk about
`
`gaps in a mo ment , but to the extent that the y have not
`
`identified the construction itself as being inappropriate, like
`
`that's all I ' m sa yi ng here.
`
`Wh en we talk about gap we will ad dress wher e the
`
`gap is in Wang an d how it is percei ved as well as some of the
`
`Patent Owner 's o wn state ments in the ir repl y. So we will ,
`
`Judge Turner, if I don't get to that when I get to it , p lease ask
`
`the question again but I think I wil l re me mb er.
`
`
`
`10
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`JUDGE TURNER : I will make sure you do. Thank
`
`you.
`
`MR. CAVANAUGH: Thank you. So this is Wang,
`
`which is the p ri mar y re ference , an d it also relates t o a
`
`plas ma-gene rating device. And it also has -- and no w I' m on
`
`slide 9 -- a rotata ble magnetron wh ich in this depiction is
`
`located above the cathode which is in green . The re is also the
`
`plas ma which is i n purple.
`
`Wang also has a DC pulsed power supply and that
`
`is on the lowe r ri ght -hand side of f igure 1. And ther e is a
`
`substrate which i s in blue and it is provided with a bias which
`
`is the voltage source 44.
`
`So the basic ele ments of what the ' 775 patent is
`
`disclosing and clai ming a re presen t in Wang and, in deed, in
`
`other pieces of pr ior art, but Wang I think is illustrative of
`
`kind of the state of the a rt and wh at is disclosed. And here I
`
`have associated t he ele ments.
`
`Because the -- an d here I've , on sli de 10, I've made
`
`an association between Wang on th e right -hand side and the
`
`'775 patent structurall y on the left - hand side. And a s the
`
`Board can apprec iate, man y of the sa me li mitations and man y
`
`of the sa me ele me nts are a part of Wang.
`
`And I thought it also might b e usef ul to go
`
`through -- let me go back to slide 1 0 for a mo ment -- to talk
`
`about the power supply which in th e '775 patent is on figure 2
`
`
`
`11
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`and the P/S in light blue, and in Wang it is the el e ment which
`
`is pulsed DC sup ply which is also in blue and on the lowe r
`
`right -hand side of figure 1 of Wang .
`
`And I thought it might be useful b ecause of the
`
`issues that the Pa tent Owner has ra ised with rega rd t o the
`
`power suppl y to walk through how the powe r suppl y of Wang
`
`relates to the power suppl y of the ' 775 patent .
`
`We se e in Wang - - and now I ' m on slide 11 -- that
`
`there is a pulse th at is provided. There is a base power ,
`
`actuall y I should sa y a power, ther e is a base po wer PB, and
`
`this is illustrated on figure 6, whic h is the lowe r pa r t of slide
`
`11, and going fr o m the P B, which i s the base po wer , to a P P,
`
`which is the pe ak power . And as you move fro m the base
`
`power to the peak power , that is what is, you know, p roviding
`
`that capabilit y or that possibility of highly ionizing the
`
`plas ma .
`
`And what I 've do ne on th e top of slide 11 is to put
`
`on figure 7, whic h is one of the suggested wa ys of a pplying
`
`the pulse in Wang , and on the bottom part of figure 7 we have
`
`a voltage supply 100 which is con nected to the c athode. And
`
`that is what provides PB. So ther e is a base power that is
`
`provided.
`
`There is also a pu lsed DC supply, 80 which we
`
`talked about a mo ment ago that pro vides a voltage p ulse and
`
`that voltage pulse is what provides PP. And that volt age pulse
`
`
`
`12
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`is what brings the ions up fro m a weakl y -ionized stat e to a
`
`strongly-ionized state, or lowl y io nized to highly io nized,
`
`depending on how one charact eriz es it.
`
`So Wang itself is taking the essential, kind of
`
`providing a base voltage and weak l y ionizing the pl as ma and
`
`then providing a stronger voltage to strongly i onize the
`
`plas ma .
`
`And we asked Dr . Ha rtsough, the P atent Owner's
`
`expert, to help us understand what the power supply was. And
`
`this is looking at Wang, which it sa ys is a t ypical pul sed
`
`power suppl y. And we asked hi m, and Wang sa ys:
`
`"Question: A t yp i cal pulsed power supply will
`
`output relatively high voltage and al most no current in the
`
`ignition phase and a lower voltage and substantial current in
`
`the maintenance phase. Do you se e that? "
`
`And we a re asking hi m to point to Wang, to look at
`
`the Wang d isclosure on colu mn 5. And he sees it. And we ask
`
`a follow-up quest ion:
`
`"Question: So we can agree that Wang is
`
`explaining how a t ypical pulsed power supply operat es; right?
`
`"Answer: Yes .
`
`"Question: And t hat's exactl y what figure 5 of the
`
`'775 pat ent is showing; right?
`
`"Answer: Yes ."
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`So the P atent Owner's expert is ide ntifying that
`
`figure 5 of the '7 75 patent is descr ibing what a t ypi cal pulsed
`
`power suppl y wo uld do.
`
`And with that , wi th the power suppl y, and we'll
`
`talk about that I t hink for so me of the dependent cla i ms, but it
`
`is i mportant that the Patent Owner' s expert identifie s the
`
`power suppl y of Wang with a t ypi cal powe r suppl y and sa ys
`
`what is going on in figure 5 is wha t is happening with a
`
`t ypical powe r sup ply in this s yste m.
`
`So the P atent Owner has r aised a f ew issues
`
`relating to the in dependent clai ms that I would like to address
`
`if there are no qu estions relating to the technology or relating
`
`to the background that I 've just pro vided.
`
`Oka y. I will go o n to the issues rai sed b y the
`
`Patent Owner . Now I ' m on slide 14. The Patent Owner has
`
`raised a fe w issue s, and I think the Board will note t hat the y
`
`are, given the si milarit y bet ween Wang and the '775 patent
`
`clai ms , the y t end to focus on so me of the details. And I want
`
`to walk t hrough t hose details with you to make sure that the
`
`Board can apprec iate that those det ails are also met b y Wang.
`
`So the first one is whether Wang, t he cathode and
`
`anode of Wang ar e ad jacent to one another, and whet her Wang
`
`for ms a gap between the anode and cathode as recite d in the
`
`clai m. And then finall y in clai m 1 5, which is a met hod clai m,
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`whether or not the clai m itself r equires a specific o rder. I will
`
`address each of t he m in turn.
`
`And here what I 've done is taken the slide that I
`
`presented prev iously and just ident ified the clai m te r ms that
`
`are in dispute as t o where the y a re . So I have dra wn dotted
`
`boxes around "adjacent" and "a gap " and for clai m 1 .
`
`I've also dr awn a line around "proxi mate" which I
`
`will talk about in a mo ment but the Patent Owner has alleged
`
`that there is a def icienc y in the pet ition which I thin k we can
`
`address fairl y con veniently after tal king about gap and
`
`adjacent .
`
`And then finall y, regarding the pre sentation of the
`
`clai ms , the ionizing of feed gas an d generating a ma g netic
`
`field are the t wo clai m li mitations that the Patent Owner
`
`perceives to r equire a specific orde r.
`
`So Wang , in the P atent Owner's vie w, Wang does
`
`not have an anode or a cathode that are ad jacent one another or
`
`for m a gap. And I will take each o f the se individuall y, but of
`
`necessity I will ta ke the m together also.
`
`So the first thing that the Patent Owner has done is
`
`said that there is a shield on -- and now I' m on slide 16 --
`
`there is a shield i n between the cat hode and anode of Wang
`
`and that's repr ese nted on the right -hand side as figur e -- of
`
`slide 16, whe re th ere is a shield 26.
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`And in the Patent Owner 's view, ap parentl y,
`
`because it is bet ween the c athode a nd anode, that it me ans that
`
`the cathode and a node are not adja cent one another.
`
`And we asked the Patent Owner , th e Patent
`
`Owne r's expert, questions about what it me ant to be adjacent .
`
`One of the things we asked was , well, if there is pla s ma
`
`between the cathode and anode, does that mean the ca thode
`
`and anode are not adjacent? And h e said, n o, of cou rse not,
`
`the cathode and a node are going to generate plas ma and that
`
`doesn't necessarily mean that becau se there is plas ma in
`
`between it doesn't mean the y' re not adjacent. We wo uld agree.
`
`And we also asked, and this is on t he left -hand side
`
`of slide 16, be cau se Dr. Hartsough, the P atent Owner 's expert,
`
`had put a si mplified version of a ca thode and anode in his
`
`declaration, we said in that constr uct is the c athode and anode
`
`adjacent? And th e electrode is, as the Board c an app reciate, is
`
`between the cathode and elect rode f or at le ast a portion of that
`
`distance, kind of going down on the scre en for that f igure.
`
`And Dr. Hartsough said yes, for a p ortion of that,
`
`that is adjacent. And we asked him to identif y wha t event or a
`
`gap on figure 7. And, you know, h e identified a couple
`
`different lines in figure 7, which is on the c enter par t of slide
`
`16, and I have ill ustrated one in a dotted line in purple for
`
`what he identified.
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`And so setting this as conditions for a gap and
`
`adjacent , I would like t o walk through his testi mon y. So this
`
`is Dr . Hartsough, the Patent Owner' s expert.
`
`"Question: I'll pose my question again: Is the
`
`anode and cathode depicted in Exhibit 1029 adjacen t to one
`
`another? "
`
`Then I a m just going to go back to slide 16 on the
`
`left -hand side, so the question is whether the anode and
`
`cathode are adjac ent to each other. And on slide 17:
`
`"Answer: In that depiction, there a re portions that
`
`are adja cent.
`
`"Question: So ar e the y ad jacent within the context
`
`of the '775 clai ms ?
`
`"Answer: Yes ."
`
`So Dr. Hartsough sa ys that that spa ce is ad ja cent
`
`and there is no pr incipled reason wh y the cathode an d anode of
`
`Wang ar en't also adjacent .
`
`Again, I' m on slide 17, we asked h i m again:
`
`"Question: Show me wher e all of t he gaps are ."
`
`And I go back to the figure. " Wh y don't you do it in black."
`
`And the lines that he dre w are between the c athode a nd anode
`
`and I've identified one in purple.
`
`"Answer: It coul d also be those di stances.
`
`"Question: That ' s what you meant b y 'edge'
`
`earlier? "
`
`
`
`17
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`And if I can get my pointer to wor k, for those in
`
`the roo m, the edg e being right here , and for those no t in the
`
`roo m it is the left -hand - most portion of the anode that is --
`
`where the beginning part of the pur ple line is. And t hat is the
`
`edge becaus e we believe, the Petitioners believe that it is, you
`
`know, the gap itself could be an y one of those, and e vidently
`
`the Patent Owner' s expert agr ees th at those could be a gap.
`
`I' m going to go b ack to slide 16 fo r a mo ment
`
`because what we' ve done is ident ify just a rep resentative
`
`purple dotted line betwe en the c athode and anode in figure 1
`
`of Wang. And it does for m a catho de, or an anode that is
`
`adjacent to the ca thode and it also for ms a gap.
`
`And, Judge Turne r, you had asked a question about
`
`whether or not Wang's gap was - - a ctuall y you asked in the
`
`context of the me ans -plus-function language and ho w the gap
`
`is described and whether or not -- I guess I' m reading into
`
`your question -- whether or not Wang has that.
`
`And just fro m a s tandpoint -- I' m o n sli de 18
`
`now -- and the Pa tent Owner, and t his is not the Peti tioner, but
`
`this is the Patent Owne r's response, identifies the ra nge of gap
`
`associated with t he '775 patent. And that's in the le ft -hand
`
`side of slide 18.
`
`And the P atent Owner identifies the ga p as being
`
`between 0 .3 centi mete rs and 10 cen ti meters . And the Patent
`
`Owne r, also in th eir response, the y sort through using a
`
`
`
`18
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`variet y of things that are on page 2 2 of the response, about
`
`what Wang's gap would be.
`
`And Hartsough, t heir expert, also opine d about
`
`what that gap wo uld be. And in their esti mation the gap would
`
`be between 10 ce nti meters and 14 centi mete rs. And so like
`
`even presu ming t hat there is a dif f erence, the gaps a s the
`
`Patent Owner has identified the m a re overlapping, 1 0
`
`centi mete rs co mmon to both.
`
`Judge Turner, doe s that answe r your question about
`
`gap or should I a pproach it a dif fe rent wa y?
`
`JUDGE TURNER : No, I think that 's fine. I' m sure
`
`Patent Owner will bring up argu me nts.
`
`MR. CAVANAUGH: Oka y. No w I' m on slide 19.
`
`The Paten t Owne r both in the preli minar y response and in the
`
`response has identified that the pet ition is deficient because
`
`we didn't allege, i n their view, whe ther or not Wang had a
`
`substrate that was proxi mate the ca thode.
`
`And while the Bo ard re cognized that th e petition
`
`was suffici ent an d had a -- and the re was a decision on
`
`institution, I wan t to address it for a mo ment just to make sure
`
`that the record is clear that the basi s of what we understand
`
`the Patent Owner to be sa ying is that because we didn't put in
`
`the clai m languag e associated with the cathode being
`
`proxi mate the substrate in the he ading of that partic ular part of
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`the petition upon which the decisio n on institution was
`
`granted, then our petition was defic ient in that regar d.
`
`I would note two thin gs: The first one is that, like ,
`
`we had used a sec ond -- an earlier ground and we ha d full y put
`
`in and then we were incorporating b y r efer ence, which is
`
`per mitted in the I PR petition prepa ration process an d, you
`
`know, it is full y i n there and I thin k it i s clea r fro m an y reader
`
`of the petition that what is being a lleged is that clai m
`
`li mitation is met b y Wang.
`
`And we also, like , wanted to clarif y it associated
`
`with Dr. Br av man, who is the Petitioner's expert for t he repl y
`
`declaration, and, you know, we w al ked through, you know, the
`
`issues of whether or not the anode and cathode are p roxi mate .
`
`And while I won't read the testi mony into the
`
`record, I think the re cord is cle ar t hat the Petitioner has both
`
`made a showing i n the petition as well as supported with
`
`evidence that the cathode and substrate a re also proxi mate .
`
`I would note both with gap -- actua lly with all
`
`three, gap , adja ce nt and the ter m pr oxi mate, the Pate nt Owner
`
`has not elected to construe the cl aim in an y wa y. The y haven't
`
`alleged that the re is so me de finition associated with the ter ms
`
`gap or proxi mate or adjacent. And the y should be ge tting their
`
`broadest reasonable interpretation, which is what we' ve
`
`applied and I think is fairl y read in Wang.
`
`
`
`20
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`So if the Board doesn't have an y q uestions about
`
`proxi mate, ad jac e nt or gap, I will move on to the se quencing
`
`of the clai m li mit ations in clai m 15.
`
`And now I' m on s lide 20, where the sequence of
`
`the steps is addre ssed. On the right -hand side of the slide I
`
`put a portion of c lai m 15. The Pat ent Owner appear s to allege
`
`that ionizing a fe ed gas must of ne cessit y happen be fore
`
`generating a mag netic field.
`
`And we had an op portunity to ask Dr . Hartsough,
`
`their expert, about that position, and this is the wa y t he
`
`colloquy went:
`
`"Question: In cla i m 15 of the '775 patent, the step
`
`of ionizing a fe ed gas does not hav e to occur before the
`
`generation of a magnetic field; rig ht?
`
`"Answer: Correc t.
`
`"Question: Bec a use, as we said, fi gure 2 has a
`
`per manent magne t, so the magnetic field will alre ady be on;
`
`right?
`
`right?
`
`"Answer: In that e mbodi ment, yea h.
`
`"Question: And t hat's an e mbodi ment of clai m 15;
`
`"Answer: Yes ."
`
`So the P atent Owner's expert recog nizes that the
`
`sequencing of the first step and sec ond step doesn't have to
`
`occur in the orde r in order to cover the disclosed e mbodiment.
`
`
`
`21
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-00604
`Patent 6,896,775
`
`
`And the final point I would make on the specific
`
`order is identif yi ng in a portion of figure 12A and 1 3A,
`
`associated with - - and this is prese nted on slide 21 - - that even
`
`that sequence, tha t process chart ha s a ppl ying a mag netic field
`
`and then ionizing a feed gas associated after appl yin g the
`
`magnetic field.
`
`And that position makes sense bec ause generating
`
`a magnetic field, you can have a magnetic field that is b y a
`
`per manent magne t, and that per ma nent magnet will alwa ys be
`
`on, if you will, a nd you could be g enerating a magn etic field
`
`b y ele ctro magnets, and that would be turned on or n ot
`
`depending on whether there is a power supply associ ated with
`
`it.
`
`And the P atent Owner, we can i ma gine, would want
`
`to have t heir cl aim, like , cover both conditions, as the y have
`
`said, as their exp ert has said . Yet the y take the position that
`
`ionizing the feed gas must occur be fore gener ating a magnetic
`
`field.
`
`I would like to move fro m the part iculars of the
`
`clai m li mitations that the Patent Owner alleges ar e not present
`
`in Wang to pr ese nt, you know, the reasons wh y so meone would
`
`co mbine the re fer ences and would have co mbined the prior art
`
`to arrive at the in vention.
`
`I will talk a little bit about -- and now I' m on slide
`
`22 -- as an introd uctor y I will talk a little bit about t he
`
`
`
`22
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`Cases IPR2014-00578 and IPR2014-