`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`________________
`
`FUJITSU SEMICONDUCTOR LIMITED,
`FUJITSU SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA, INC.,
`ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC., RENESAS ELECTRONICS
`CORPORATION, RENESAS ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`GLOBALFOUNDRIES U.S., INC., GLOBALFOUNDRIES DRESDEN
`MODULE ONE LLC & CO. KG, GLOBALFOUNDRIES DRESDEN
`MODULE TWO LLC & CO. KG, TOSHIBA AMERICA ELECTRONIC
`COMPONENTS, INC., TOSHIBA AMERICA INC., TOSHIBA
`AMERICA INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC.,
`TOSHIBA CORPORATION, and
`THE GILLETTE COMPANY,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`ZOND, LLC,
`Patent Owner
`________________
`
`IPR2014-008181
`Patent 6,853,142 B2
`
`________________
`
`PETITIONER’S REPLY TO PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`
`1 Cases IPR 2014-00866, IPR 2014-01012, and IPR 2014-01075 have been joined
`with the instant proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................... iii
`
`PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LIST ............................................................................ iv
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1
`
`II. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ................................................................................ 1
`
`A. “Weakly-Ionized Plasma” and “Strongly-Ionized Plasma” ......................... 1
`
`III. RESPONSE TO ARGUMENTS ......................................................................... 2
`
`A. Zond Improperly Confounds the Embodiments of Wang. ........................... 2
`
`B. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have combined Wang and
`Lantsman. ...................................................................................................... 3
`
`C. Wang in view of Lantsman teaches “the feed gas diffusing the strongly-
`ionized plasma, thereby allowing additional power from the pulsed
`power supply to be absorbed by the strongly ionized plasma” recited in
`claim 1 and similarly in recited in claim 10. ................................................ 5
`
`D. Wang in view of Lantsman teaches “an electrical pulse having a
`magnitude and a rise time that is sufficient to increase the density of the
`weakly-ionized plasma to generate a strongly-ionized plasma” recited
`in claim 1 and claim 10. ................................................................................ 8
`
`E. Wang in view of Lantsman teaches “selecting at least one of a pulse
`amplitude and a pulse width of the electrical pulse in order to cause the
`strongly-ionized plasma to be substantially uniform” recited in
`dependent claim 15. ...................................................................................... 9
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`F. Wang in view of Lantsman teaches “the gas line supplies additional
`feed gas that exchanges the weakly-ionized plasma while applying the
`electrical pulse across” recited in claims 3 and 12. .................................... 11
`
`G. Wang in view of Lantsman teaches “the power supply generates a
`constant power” recited in claim 4 and “the power supply generates a
`constant voltage” recited in claim 5. .......................................................... 13
`
`H. Wang in view of Lantsman teaches “the ionization source is chosen
`from the group comprising an electrode coupled to a DC power supply”
`recited in claim 6. ....................................................................................... 15
`
`IV. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................. 15
`
`Certificate of Service .............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Cases
`
`In re Mouttet, 686 F.3d 1322, 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ................................................ 5
`
`Rules
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.23 ............................................................................................................. 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LIST
`
`
`
`April 16, 2015
`
`Description
`
`Exhibit
`
`1001 U.S. Patent No. 6,853,142 (“’142 Patent”)
`
`1002 Kortshagen Declaration (“Kortshagen Decl.”)
`
`1003 D.V. Mozgrin, et al, High-Current Low-Pressure Quasi-Stationary
`Discharge in a Magnetic Field: Experimental Research, Plasma Physics
`Reports, Vol. 21, No. 5, 1995 (“Mozgrin”)
`
`1004 U.S. Patent No. 6,190,512 (“Lantsman”)
`
`1005 U.S. Pat. No. 6,413,382 (“Wang”)
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`Plasma Etching: An Introduction, by Manos and Flamm, Academic
`Press (1989) (“Manos”)
`
`10/07/03 Office Action
`
`03/08/04 Response
`
`03/29/04 Allowance
`
`1010 U.S. Patent No. 7,147,759 (“the ’759 patent”)
`
`05/02/06 Response from the ’759 patent file history
`
`The Materials Science of Thin Films, by Ohring M., Academic Press
`(1992) (“Ohring”)
`
`Thin-Film Deposition: Principles & Practice by Smith, D.L., McGraw
`Hill (1995) (“Smith”)
`
`04/21/08 Response in EP 1560943
`
`Claim Chart Based on Mozgrin and Lantsman used in 1:13-cv-11570-
`
`iv
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`RGS (“Claim Chart based on Mozgrin and Lantsman”)
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`Claim Chart Based on Wang and Lantsman used in 1:13-cv-11570-
`RGS (“Claim Chart based on Wang and Lantsman”)
`
`Claim Chart Based on Wang, Lantsman and Mozgrin used in 1:13-cv-
`11570-RGS (“Claim Chart based on Wang, Lantsman and Mozgrin”)
`
`1018 Affidavit of Anthony J. Fitzpatrick in support of motion for pro hac
`vice admission.
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`Stipulations of Dismissals
`
`“Board Only” Settlement Agreement
`
`Rismiller Declaration ISO Motion for PHV Admission of Brett C
`Rismiller
`
`1022 Declaration of Dr. Lawrence J. Overzet (“Overzet Decl.”)
`
`1023 Dr. Hartsough Deposition Transcript for U.S. Patent No. 7,808,184
`
`1024 Dr. Hartsough Deposition Transcript for U.S. Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`1025 Dr. Hartsough Deposition Transcript for U.S. Patent No. 8,125,155
`
`1026 Dr. Hartsough Deposition Transcript for U.S. Patent No. 6,896,775
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Petitioner submits this reply under 37 C.F.R. § 42.23 in response to Patent
`
`Owner’s Response to Petition filed on January 2, 2015 (“Response,” Paper No. 26).
`
`The evidence and arguments in this reply confirm the Board’s initial determination
`
`that claims 1, 3-10, 12, 15, 17-20, and 42 of the ’142 Patent are rendered obvious
`
`over the prior art of record and thus should be canceled.
`
`Indeed, the ’142 Patent presents nothing novel; and Zond’s own declarant
`
`Dr. Hartsough concedes that the limitations in the claims were well known before
`
`the effective date of the ’142 Patent. See e.g., Ex. 1024 at 30:3-35:21.
`
`II. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`A.
`“Weakly-Ionized Plasma” and “Strongly-Ionized Plasma”
`The Board construed the term strongly-ionized plasma to mean a plasma with a
`
`relatively high peak density of ions and the term weakly-ionized plasma to mean a
`
`plasma with a relatively low peak density of ions. Petitioners and their experts agree
`
`with this construction. Ex. 2010 at 25:25-26:23; Ex. 1022, ¶¶ 22-30. This construction
`
`is consistent with the ’142 Patent in that it does not require any specific or quantified
`
`difference in magnitude between the peak ion densities of the weakly-ionized plasma
`
`and the strongly-ionized plasma. Ex. 1022, ¶ 28-29. Also, Zond’s declarant, Dr.
`
`Hartsough, agrees with the Board’s construction and concedes that there is “not a
`
`magic number that one can arbitrarily say across all conditions as to what’s a weakly
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`ionized plasma or a strongly ionized plasma.” Ex. 1023 at 60:5-8; 63:7-10.
`
`III. RESPONSE TO ARGUMENTS
`A. Zond Improperly Confounds the Embodiments of Wang.
`Zond’s arguments directed to Wang are flawed, for among other reasons,
`
`because throughout they indiscriminately transition between two different
`
`embodiments of Wang – applying statements directed from one embodiment (Fig.
`
`4) to another embodiment (Fig. 6). Ex. 1022, ¶ 53.
`
`
`
`Ex. 1005, Figs 4 and 6 (annotated); Ex 1022, ¶ 53.
`
`Wang shows and discusses a system diagram of a magnetron sputter reactor
`
`in Fig. 1, and then in connection with Figs. 4 and 6, shows and discusses two
`
`different embodiments, respectively, of pulsing a target in the reactor of Fig. 1. See
`
`Ex. 1005 at 3:37-50. These two separate and distinct embodiments are illustrated in
`
`the figures reproduced above. Further, Dr. Overzet provides a chart summarizing
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`the difference between these two embodiments, including the portion cited below.
`
`Ex. 1022, ¶¶ 54-58.
`
`
`
`Wang embodiment of Fig. 4
`
`Wang embodiment of Fig. 6
`
`Internal
`impedance
`
`“[C]hamber impedance
`dramatically changes.” Wang
`at 5:29-30, 52-53.
`
`“[C]hamber impedance changes
`relatively little ….” Wang at 7:49-
`51.
`
`Power
`Pulse or
`Voltage
`Pulse
`
`Arcing
`
`“Where chamber impedance
`is changing, the power pulse
`width is preferably specified
`rather than the current or
`voltage pulse widths.” Wang
`at 5:52-54.
`
`Where chamber impedance changes
`“relatively little,” there is no
`preference to specify power pulse
`over current or voltage pulse. See
`Wang at 7:49-51.
`
`Tendency to arc during
`ignition/generation of strongly
`ionized plasma: See Wang at
`7:1-12.
`
`Arcing is avoided during ignition
`and during generation of strongly
`ionized plasma. See Wang at 7:26-
`28, 47-48.
`
`B. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have combined Wang
`and Lantsman.
`
`Zond argues that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not combine
`
`Wang and Lantsman because each reference allegedly discloses very different
`
`structures and processes. Response at 28-33. These arguments are based on
`
`physically incorporating Lantsman into Wang. This is not the proper standard for
`
`determining obviousness. In re Mouttet, 686 F.3d 1322, 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (“It
`
`is well-established that a determination of obviousness based on teachings from
`
`multiple references does not require an actual, physical substitution of elements.”).
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`Further, Zond’s argument is incorrect and shows a clear misunderstanding of
`
`the ordinary level of skill in the art. Ex. 1022, ¶ 66. Whether Wang and Lantsman
`
`teach different processing conditions is beside the point; these conditions are
`
`determined by external factors such as process flow and recipes, which a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would have been accustomed to working with on a regular
`
`basis. A skilled artisan would consider it routine to make any necessary changes to
`
`accommodate any and all such factors. Ex. 1022, ¶¶ 67-68. And Zond’s declarant,
`
`Dr. Hartsough, concedes that notwithstanding physical differences, Lantsman’s
`
`teachings are applicable to any plasma process, including Wang’s magnetron
`
`sputtering process. Ex. 1024 at 65:2-15; Ex. 1004 at 6:14-17.
`
`Further still, and contrary to Zond’s arguments, Wang and Lantsman are
`
`strikingly similar, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would be encouraged to
`
`combine the teachings of the two references. Ex. 1022, ¶ 69. For instance, both
`
`Wang and Lantsman teach two stage plasma sputtering systems. See Ex. 1005 at
`
`7:28-30 (“the application of the high peak power PP instead quickly causes the
`
`already existing plasma to spread and increases the density of the plasma.”); Ex.
`
`1004 at 2:48-51; 4:58-61; 5:5-8 (discussing first “limited” plasma stage, and a
`
`second “substantial” plasma stage). Also, Lantsman uses a continuous flow of feed
`
`gas, and Wang uses a mass flow controller (34), which would be understood to
`
`control continuous flow of feed gas. Ex. 1022, ¶ 69; see also Ex. 1005 at 4:53.
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`C. Wang in view of Lantsman teaches “the feed gas diffusing the
`strongly-ionized plasma, thereby allowing additional power from the
`pulsed power supply to be absorbed by the strongly ionized plasma”
`recited in claim 1 and similarly in recited in claim 10.
`
`Zond argues that Wang “does not teach feed gas diffusing the strongly-ionized
`
`plasma to thereby allow additional power from the pulsed power supply to be
`
`absorbed by the strongly ionized plasma.” See Response at 1-2; 35-36. Zond attempts
`
`to support this by arguing that the feed gas in Wang enters “far from the area where
`
`plasma is generated at the top of the chamber near the cathode.” Id. at 2; see also Ex.
`
`2005, ¶ 96. As discussed below, this argument is contrary to basic physics.
`
`As a threshold matter, it is noted that Dr. Hartsough concedes that Lantsman
`
`“indicates that the feed gas is provided throughout the sputtering process.” Ex. 1024 at
`
`66:3-5; see also Ex. 1004 at 3:9-13; 4:8-10, 36-38; 5:30-61; Ex. 1022, ¶ 80; see also
`
`Ex. 2011 at 81:14-19. Dr. Hartsough also concedes that Lantsman teaches providing
`
`the continuous feed gas to the strongly ionized plasma. Ex. 1024 at 71:1-25.
`
`Moreover, Dr. Hartsough concedes that “the gas will tend to diffuse
`
`throughout the whole volume.” Ex. 1024 at 88:22-89:2. Dr. Hartsough also
`
`concedes that the continuous feed gas will diffuse (or mingle/intermingle (Ex. 1024 at
`
`87:22-88:9)) into the high-density plasma:
`
`Q. Well, if the high -- the area of the high-density plasma is small
`relative to the total volume, then there will be a tendency for -- as you
`put it, there will be tendency to lower the pressure of the gas atoms in
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`that high-density plasma; correct?
`A. It would try to expand.
`Q. And if gas is being fed into that volume, then it will, in turn, try
`to diffuse into that area of high-density plasma; correct?
`…
`THE WITNESS: It will mingle.
`Ex. 1024 at 92:18-93:7.
`
`Indeed, Dr. Hartsough had no option but to concede this point because Zond’s
`
`argument is contrary to basic principles of gas motion. Ex. 1022, ¶ 74 and ¶¶ 77-78;
`
`see also Ex. 2011 at 74:6-14. Wang’s Fig. 1 has been reproduced and annotated below
`
`to illustrate the plasma region 42 inside the chamber, and the location where the feed
`
`gas 32, i.e., Argon (Ar), a noble gas, enters the chamber. Ex. 1022, ¶ 75.
`
`Plasma
`
`Feed gas enters here, and
`then fills the volume by
`diffusive motion
`
`Ex.1005, Fig. 1 (annotated); see also Ex. 1022, ¶ 75.
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`As can be seen from Figure 1, the feed gas enters and is directed toward the
`
`curved shape of the anode 24. The gas moves throughout the region 22, including
`
`plasma region 42. See Ex. 1005 at 4:5-12. A “plasma of the argon working gas” is
`
`then formed at the plasma region 42, and the argon gas is eventually removed by a
`
`vacuum system 38. Id. at 4:5-15. Thus in the system of Wang, the Argon feed gas will
`
`diffuse into the high density plasma, thereby allowing additional power from the
`
`pulsed power supply to be absorbed by the plasma. Ex. 1022, ¶ 76.
`
`Further, Dr. Hartsough testified that to deposit TiN on a substrate, the feed gas
`
`including Nitrogen will need to be supplied continuously to the plasma chamber. Ex.
`
`1023 at 184:22-185:3. This is consistent with Dr. Overzet’s conclusion that Wang
`
`teaches a continuous supply of Argon feed gas including Nitrogen for use with a
`
`Titanium target, “to form TiN on the surface of the wafer.” Ex. 1022, ¶ 79; Ex. 1005
`
`at 4:19-23. Further still, Dr. Hartsough concedes that “providing continuous flow of
`
`gas into a chamber was well known by a person of ordinary skill.” Ex. 1024 at 32:18-
`
`33:5; see also Ex. 2011 at 81:14-19. Thus, even if Wang did not teach a continuous
`
`feed of gas during the plasma process – which it does – this was well known by a
`
`person of ordinary skill and consistent with the teachings of Lantsman. Ex. 1022, ¶
`
`80; see also Ex. 2011 at 81:14-19.
`
`Zond finally argues that Petitioners have provided no evidence “indicating that
`
`a skilled artisan would have had a reasonable expectation of success of achieving a
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`system that supplies feed gas to diffuse strongly ionized plasma to allow it to absorb
`
`additional power as claimed in the ‘142 Patent by modifying Wang.” Response at 29.
`
`This argument is flawed for several reasons. First, as discussed above, it is clear that
`
`Wang’s strongly-ionized plasma is diffused with the feed gas. Second, as also
`
`discussed above, Lantsman teaches two stages of plasma: a first “limited” plasma and
`
`a second “substantial” plasma. Ex. 1004 at 2:48-51; 4:58-61; 5:6. Since the second,
`
`substantial plasma is denser than the initial plasma, it reads on the claimed “strongly-
`
`ionized plasma” per the agreed-upon construction of that term. Ex. 1022, ¶¶ 69, 82;
`
`see also Ex. 1024 at 71:1-21. Third, experiments are not necessary to prove the basic
`
`principle which skilled artisans knew; namely, that a feed gas is commonly used to
`
`diffuse a strongly-ionized plasma. Ex. 1022, ¶ 83. As stated above, both Wang and
`
`Lantsman teach such things, and as admitted by Dr. Hartsough this was a basic,
`
`common, and normal practice in the art. Id.; Ex. 1024 at 32:18-33:5.
`
`D. Wang in view of Lantsman teaches “an electrical pulse having a
`magnitude and a rise time that is sufficient to increase the density of the
`weakly-ionized plasma to generate a strongly-ionized plasma” recited in
`claim 1 and claim 10.
`
`Zond argues that “Wang does not teach that the magnitude and rise time are
`
`sufficient to increase the density of weakly ionized plasma to generate strongly
`
`ionized plasma . . .” Response at 42. This argument fails as discussed below.
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`All of the experts agree that Wang teaches a weakly and a strongly ionized
`
`plasma. Ex. 1025 at 140:7-25; Ex. 1022, ¶¶ 70-72; Ex. 2011 at 151:25-152:6.
`
`Further, Wang specifically teaches that a magnitude (amplitude) is selected and
`
`delivered during the peak power pulse PP to generate a strongly ionized plasma. See,
`
`e.g., Ex. 1005, 7:28-30; Fig. 7; Ex. 1022, ¶ 85. This voltage amplitude is relative to
`
`the voltage during background power PB such that “the peak power PP is at least 10
`
`times the background power PB … and most preferably 1000 times to achieve the
`
`greatest effect of the invention.” Ex. 1005 at 7:19-22. Wang also teaches using a high-
`
`pass filter allowing a specific peak pulse width and rise time. Ex. 1005 at 7:65-8:1;
`
`Fig. 7 (see HPF 104). Dr. Hartsough concedes that a high-pass filter “could enable
`
`fast rise times.” Ex. 1023 at 181:9-17. Also, and like the ’142 Patent, Wang notes
`
`that the particular shape of the pulse depends on the design of the power supply.
`
`Ex. 1005 at 5:25-27 (The “exact shape depends on the design of the pulsed DC
`
`power supply 80, and significant rise times . . . are expected.”); Ex. 1001 at 13:66-
`
`14:5 (“The particular … shape …of the high-power pulses depend[s] on various
`
`factors including …the design of the pulsed power supply.”).
`
`E. Wang in view of Lantsman teaches “selecting at least one of a
`pulse amplitude and a pulse width of the electrical pulse in order to
`cause the strongly-ionized plasma to be substantially uniform” recited
`in dependent claim 15.
`
`Zond admits that Wang has uniform plasma, but argues that the substantially
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`uniform plasma that is not the result of selecting either the amplitude or width of an
`
`electrical pulse. Response at 42-43. It appears that Zond is arguing that Wang’s
`
`substantially uniform plasma is solely due to the rotating magnetron. Id. citing Ex.
`
`2005, ¶ 105 (“Wang [] teaches that the uniformity of its plasma is limited to the area
`
`beneath the rotating magnet.”). The claim, however, only requires that plasma be
`
`uniform, not that it be uniform across the entire cathode at a single point in time. Ex.
`
`1022, ¶ 104. And, while a rotating magnetron does help to spread and make a uniform
`
`plasma (Ex. 1026 at 130:11-20) Wang is clear that selecting the amplitude and the
`
`width of the power pulse PP also contributes to the uniformity. Ex. 1022, ¶¶ 104-107.
`
`This is further represented in Fig. 2 of Dr. Overzet’s declaration, reproduced below.
`
`Ex. 1022, Fig. 2.
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`Dr. Overzet’s Fig. 2 shows how the plasma is uniform in the localized area
`
`under the cathode/target aligned with the magnet. It is also noted that there is an
`
`area between the cathode/target and the plasma called a “sheath,” and the electric
`
`field is substantially uniform in the sheath on the plane between the plasma and the
`
`cathode/target. Ex. 1022, ¶¶ 104-105.
`
`Wang also describes that the rotation of the magnet moves the uniform
`
`strongly-ionized plasma to provide a resulting electric field and plasma that are
`
`uniform over the entire surface of the cathode/target. Dr. Hartsough concedes that
`
`this is carried out in order to cause a more uniform erosion of the target over time.
`
`Ex. 1026 at 128:14-22. Further, Dr. Hartsough concedes that Wang teaches the
`
`formation of a uniform plasma over time. Ex. 1026 at 130:11-16. This means that
`
`the uniformity of the plasma is a direct result of two things: (1) the amplitude and
`
`pulse width of the electric field spreading out the plasma under the magnet; and (2)
`
`the magnet rotation causing the plasma to cover the entire surface of the
`
`cathode/target over time. Ex. 1022, ¶ 107.
`
`F. Wang in view of Lantsman teaches “the gas line supplies
`additional feed gas that exchanges the weakly-ionized plasma while
`applying the electrical pulse across” recited in claims 3 and 12.
`
`Zond first argues that Wang does not disclose this limitation because Wang
`
`does not teach “adding feed gas while applying an electrical pulse . . . .” Response at
`
`44. Contrary to Zond’s argument, and as discussed above, Wang teaches adding
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`Nitrogen to the feed gas for use with a Titanium target, thereby depositing Titanium
`
`Nitride (TiN). Ex. 1005 at 4:19-23. The feed gas, including the Nitrogen, is supplied
`
`continuously into the plasma so as to maintain the TiN deposition. Ex. 1022, ¶ 86; Ex.
`
`1023 at 184:22-185:3.
`
`Zond second argues that Lantsman does not disclose this limitation because it
`
`“does not disclose a pulsed power supply; it instead discloses only two DC power
`
`supplies.” Response at 43-44. In other words, Zond is arguing that since Lantsman
`
`does not teach a pulse, it cannot suggest supplying additional feed gas “while applying
`
`the electrical pulse.” Contrary to Zond’s argument, Lantsman clearly suggests
`
`providing a continual gas feed during the plasma processing. See ,e.g., Ex. 1004 at
`
`4:8-10; 5:30-61. Further, Lantsman discloses a pulse because it teaches a first
`
`“limited” plasma stage, and a second “substantial” plasma stage, (see id. at 2:48-51;
`
`4:61; 5:6), and consistent with Zond’s assertions, the different voltage/current/power
`
`levels that occur would be a pulse. Ex. 1022, ¶ 88. Indeed, Zond’s declarant, Dr.
`
`Hartsough, has the same understanding; noting that “a pulse is-- as you might say, is
`
`something that increases and has duration and decreases.” Ex. 1023 at 91:1-7.
`
`This is exactly what Lantsman shows in its figures. See e.g., Ex. 1004 Figs. 2, 3, 6, 7,
`
`and 8; Ex. 1022, ¶ 88.
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`G. Wang in view of Lantsman teaches “the power supply generates a
`constant power” recited in claim 4 and “the power supply generates a
`constant voltage” recited in claim 5.
`
`Zond argues that Wang does not teach a constant power or a constant voltage.
`
`Response at 46, 49. However, Zond’s argument is contradicted by its own
`
`declarant, Dr. Hartsough, who concedes that Wang’s power supply generates a
`
`constant power: “Wang’s power supply 80 emits a series of [voltage] pulses as
`
`shown [in Fig. 7], wherein the power supply tries to maintain a constant power
`
`level [as shown in Fig. 6].” Ex. 2005, ¶ 57. Dr. Hartsough also concedes that in
`
`systems like Wang’s where “the chamber impedance changes relatively little
`
`between,” “voltage would approach a constant value.” Ex. 1023 at 152:4-6; Ex.
`
`1025 at 176:20-25; Ex. 1005 at 7:49-51.
`
`Dr. Hartsough further concedes that the typical power supply described by
`
`Wang operates exactly as how Fig. 5 of the ’775 Patent operates. Ex. 1026 at
`
`149:17-150:20 (“…Q: So we can agree that Wang is explaining how a typical
`
`pulsed power supply operates; right? A: Yes … Q: And that’s exactly what
`
`Figure 5 of the ‘775 patent is showing; right? … A: Yes.”). Notably, Fig. 5 of
`
`the ’775 Patent is the same as Fig. 4 of the ’142 Patent, which Dr. Hartsough
`
`concedes operates in “power mode.” Ex. 1024 at 45:10-12.
`
`Figs. 6 and 7 of Wang, below, show similar wave forms as Fig. 4 of the ’142
`
`Patent. In fact, Wang’s wave forms, like the ’142 Patent, include portions that are
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`of “constant power” and “constant voltage.” Ex. 1022, ¶¶ 115-117. For example,
`
`during the PB phase, shown in Figure 6, Wang states that the DC power supply
`
`“supplies an essentially constant negative voltage” and during the PP phase Wang
`
`at Fig. 7 illustrates that the voltage pulses have a constant amplitude. Ex. 1005 at
`
`7:57-61; Fig. 7 (emphasis added); Ex. 1022, ¶ 117; see also Ex. 2011 at 179:12-
`
`180:2.
`
`Ex. 1001, Fig. 4 (annotated); Ex. 1005, Figs. 6 and 7 (annotated).
`
`
`
`Moreover, Zond’s assertion that Wang’s pulse is a full width at half
`
`maximum does not mean that the power is always changing. Ex. 1022, ¶ 118. In
`
`fact, for a majority of time (except for transitions between background power PB
`
`and peak power PP, where the state of the plasma changes), Wang’s power and
`
`voltage will be constant. Ex. 1022, ¶ 119.
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`H. Wang in view of Lantsman teaches “the ionization source is
`chosen from the group comprising an electrode coupled to a DC power
`supply” recited in claim 6.
`
`Zond argues that an anode and cathode are not electrodes and that the
`
`claimed electrode is a “filament.” Response at 53-54. Zond’s argument is
`
`contradicted by its declarant, Dr. Hartsough, who concedes that under the
`
`“broadest possible interpretation, ‘electrode’ would include . . . other electrodes
`
`in the system” including “the anode and the cathode.” Ex. 1024 at 98:17-99:15.
`
`Dr. Overzet confirms this understanding. Ex. 1022, ¶ 128.
`
`IV. CONCLUSION
`For the reasons set forth in the Petition and above, claims 1, 3-10, 12, 15, 17-
`
`20, and 42 of the ’142 Patent are unpatentable and should be canceled.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: April 16, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
` /s/ David M. Tennant
`David M. Tennant
`Registration No. 48,362
`Lead Counsel for Petitioner
`GlobalFoundries
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`
`IPR2014-00818
` Patent No. 6,853,142
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies, in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.105, that
`
`service was made on the Patent Owner as detailed below.
`
`Date of service April 16, 2015
`
`Manner of service Electronic Mail
`
`Documents served Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response;
`
`Exhibits 1022 - 1026; and
`
`Petitioner’s Exhibit List of April 16, 2015
`
`Persons served
`
`
`
`
`
`Dr. Gregory Gonsalves
`2216 Beacon Lane
`Falls Church, Virginia 22043
`
`Bruce Barker
`Chao Hadidi Stark & Barker LLP
`176 East Mail Street, Suite 6
`Westborough, MA 01581
`
`
`/s/ Anna Goodall
`
`
`
`
`
`Anna Goodall
`White & Case LLP
`3000 El Camino Real
`Five Palo Alto Square, 9th Floor
`Palo Alto, CA 94306
`Tel: (650) 213-0367
`Email: agoodall@whitecase.com
`
`16
`
`
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
