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., GLOBAL
`FOUNDRIES 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
`
`Case IPR2014-828, 829, 917, 1073, and 1076
`U.S. Patent 6,805,779
`
`PATENT OWNER ZOND’S OBSERVATIONS ON
`CROSS-EXAMINATION O F D R . K O R T S H A G E N
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`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., GLOBAL
`FOUNDRIES 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
`
`Case IPR2014-828, 829, 917, 1073, and 1076
`U.S. Patent 6,805,779
`
`PATENT OWNER ZOND’S OBSERVATIONS ON
`CROSS-EXAMINATION O F D R . K O R T S H A G E N
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner, Zond LLC (“Zond”), hereby files observations on the
`
`testimony given by Petitioners’ Declarant Dr. Kortshagen (Exhibit 2006) at a
`
`deposition held on May 5, 2015.
`
`(1) Testimony From Dr. Kortshagen Indicating That Iwamura Does Not Teach A
`
`Magnetic Field: At the following transcript location (Exhibit 2006), when asked
`
`questions relating to Iwamura, Dr. Kortshagen testified that Iwamura does not
`
`teach a magnetic field. The testimony is relevant because many of the claims of
`
`U.S. patent 6,805,779 (“the ‘779 patent”) recite limitations requiring a magnetic
`
`field and therefore, the testimony indicates that Iwamura cannot possibly teach
`
`these limitations:
`
`Q. Is it correct that Iwamura does not discuss the use of a magnetic
`
`field?
`
`MR. TENNANT: Objection to form.
`
`THE WITNESS: I believe it is correct that Iwamura does not discuss
`
`the use of a magnetic field.
`
`(Exhibit 2006, p. 7, ll. 13-18)
`
`
`
`(2) Testimony From Dr. Kortshagen Indicating That In Pinsley, The Magnetic
`
`Field Would Not Have Any Effect On The Motion Of Any Ground State Atoms In The
`
`Absence Of A Discharge: At the following transcript locations (Exhibit 2006), when
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`asked questions relating to the magnetic field in Pinsley, Dr. Kortshagen testified
`
`that the magnetic field would not have any effect on the motion of any ground state
`
`atoms in the absence of a discharge. This testimony is relevant because it indicates
`
`that the magnetic field in Pinsely does not effect the volume of ground state atoms
`
`and therefore, does not teach many of the claim limitations of the ‘779 patent that
`
`require generating a magnetic field proximate to a volume of ground state atoms:
`
`Q. Are there any ground state atoms in that feed gas?
`
`A. Commonly, the majority of atoms in a feed gas will likely be in the
`
`ground state.
`
`Q. So what, if anything, would be the effect of the magnetic field in
`
`Pinsley on those ground state atoms?
`
`A. Are you asking the question whether there is an effect on the
`
`ground state atoms by the magnetic field in the absence of a discharge?
`
`Q. We could start there.
`
`A. Okay.
`
`Q. So let's say in the absence of a discharge, that would presume the
`
`absence of an electric field, right?
`
`A. It would presume the absence of a current that could still be an
`
`electric field too weak to actually maintain or ignite a plasma.
`
`Q. Okay. So under those conditions, what if anything would be the
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`effect of the magnetic field on the ground state atoms coming from
`
`the source?
`
`A. … part of my answer is that there is no effect on the ground state
`
`atoms that would in any way affect their motion. And I'm saying I'm
`
`thinking on a tangent because you could imagine a gas with ground
`
`state atoms which have some kind of a magnetic moment, but I don't
`
`think that this is what you're referring to, right?
`
`Q. I'm sorry, what do you mean by a magnetic moment?
`
`A. Well, I mean some kind of magnetic moment yeah, I mean, I
`
`cannot think of any kind of gas which would have something like this.
`
`A gas like argon, helium would not feel any effect by the magnetic
`
`field.
`
`(Exhibit 2006, p. 21, l. 3 – p. 22, l. 16).
`
`
`
`(3) Testimony From Dr. Kortshagen Indicating That Angelbeck Does Not Teach
`
`A Feed Gas: At the following transcript location (Exhibit 2006), when asked
`
`questions relating to Iwamura, Dr. Kortshagen testified that Angelbeck does not
`
`teach a feed gas. The testimony is relevant because many of the claims of the ‘779
`
`patent recite limitations requiring a feed gas and therefore, the testimony indicates
`
`that Angelbeck cannot possibly teach these limitations:
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Q. Now, within the tube shown in Figure 1 there is a gas, correct?
`
`A. Yes, that is correct.
`
`Q. The ends of the tube are closed so the gas is not flowing, right?
`
`A. In this particular configuration shown in Figure 1 the gas is not
`
`flowing, that is correct.
`
`(Exhibit 2006, p. 29, l. 22, p. 30, l. 5)
`
`
`
`(4) Testimony From Dr. Kortshagen Indicating That In Angelbeck, The
`
`Magnetic Field Would Not Have Any Effect On The Motion Of Any Ground State
`
`Atoms In The Absence Of A Current Flow: At the following transcript locations
`
`(Exhibit 2006), when asked questions relating to the magnetic field in Angelbeck,
`
`Dr. Kortshagen testified that the magnetic field would not have any effect on the
`
`motion of any ground state atoms in the absence of a current flow. This testimony
`
`is relevant because it indicates that the magnetic field in Angelbeck does not effect
`
`the volume of ground state atoms and therefore, does not teach many of the claim
`
`limitations of the ‘779 patent that require generating a magnetic field proximate to a
`
`volume of ground state atoms:
`
`Q. In the absence of any current flow, what, if anything, would be the
`
`effect of the magnetic field on those ground state atoms?
`
`MR. TENNANT: Objection to form.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`THE WITNESS: In the absence of a current flow, as we discussed in
`
`Pinsley, I believe there is no effect of the magnetic field on the ground
`
`state atoms.
`
`(Exhibit 2006, p. 30, ll. 11-18).
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Dr. Gregory J. Gonsalves
`Dr. Gregory J. Gonsalves (Reg. No. 43,639)
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`I certify that the foregoing Patent Owner Zond’s Observations On Cross
`
`Examination was served on the Petitioner by e m a i l at the following e m a i l addresses
`
`on May 12, 2015.
`
`For Petitioner: FUJITSU SEMICONDUCTOR LIMITED AND
`FUJITSU SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA, INC.
`
`David L. McCombs David M. O’Dell
`Haynes and Boone, LLP
`2323 Victory Avenue, Suite 700
`Dallas, TX 75219
`Tel: (214) 651-5533
`Email: David.McCombs@haynesboone.com;
`david.odell@haynesboone.com
`
` For Petitioner: THE GILETTE COMPANY David Cavanagh Larissa
`Park
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
`60 State Street Boston, MA 02109
`Tel: (617) 526-5000
`Email: David. Cavanaugh@wilmerhale.com;
`Larissa.Park@wilmerhale.com
`
`For Petitioner: 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., AND TOSHIBA CORPORATION
`Robinson Vu BAKER BOTTS LLP ONE SHELL PLAZA 910
`LOUISIANA STREET HOUSTON, TX 77002
`
`Robinson.vu@bakerbotts.com
`Brian M. Berliner Ryan K. Yagura Xin-Yi Zhou
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP
`400 S. HOPE STREET LOS ANGELES, CA 90071
`bberliner@omm.com; ryagura@omm.com; vzhou@omm.com
`
`
`John Feldhaus Pavan Agarwal Mike Houston
`FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
`3000 K STREET, N.W., SUITE 600
`WASHINGTON, DC 20007
`jfeldhaus@foley.com; pagarwal@foley.com; mhouston@foley.com
`
`David M. Tennant
`WHITE & CASE LLP
`701 THIRTEENTH STREET, NW
`WASHINGTON, DC 20005
`dtennant@whitecase.com
`
`
`/s/ Gregory J. Gonsalves
`Dr. Gregory J. Gonsalves
`Reg. No. 43,639
`2216 Beacon Lane
`Falls Church, Virginia 22043
`(571) 419-7252
`gonsalves@gonsalveslawfirm.com
`
`
`
`
`8
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
