throbber
DOCKET NO: 0107131-00269 US3
`‘779 Patent
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`PATENT:
`
`6,805,779, CLAIMS 30-40
`
`INVENTOR: ROMAN CHISTYAKOV
`
`
`
`FILED:
`
`MARCH 21, 2003
`
`ISSUED: OCTOBER 19, 2004
`
`PLASMA GENERATION USING MULTI-STEP IONIZATION
`
`TITLE:
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`DECLARATION OF UWE KORTSHAGEN, PH.D., REGARDING
`CLAIMS 30-40 of U.S. PATENT NO. 6,805,779
`
`I, Uwe Kortshagen, declare as follows:
`
`1. My name is Uwe Kortshagen.
`
`2.
`
`I received my Diploma in Physics from the University of Bochum in
`
`Germany in 1988. I received my Ph.D. in Physics from University of Bochum in
`
`1991 and my Habilitation in Experimental Physics from University of Bochum in
`
`1995.
`
`3.
`
`I am a Distinguished McKnight University Professor at the University
`
`of Minnesota. I have been the Head of the Mechanical Engineering Department at
`
`- 1 -
`
`GILLETTE 1202
`
`

`

`the University of Minnesota since July 2008. I have been a Professor at the
`
`Mechanical Engineering Department at the University of Minnesota since August
`
`2003. Between August 1999 and August 2003, I was an Associate Professor at the
`
`Mechanical Engineering Department at the University of Minnesota. Between July
`
`1996 and August 1999, I was an Assistant Professor at the Mechanical Engineering
`
`Department at the University of Minnesota. Between April 1996 and July 1996, I
`
`was a Lecturer at the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of
`
`Bochum, Germany. Between August 2006 and June 2008, I was the Director of
`
`Graduate Studies at the Mechanical Engineering Department at the University of
`
`Minnesota.
`
`4.
`
`I have taught courses on Introduction to Plasma Technology and
`
`Advanced Plasma Technology. These courses include significant amounts of
`
`material on plasma technology. In addition, I have taught a Special Topics class
`
`on Plasma Nanotechnology.
`
`5.
`
`Plasma processes for advanced technological applications has been
`
`the primary area of my professional research for over 30 years. Most of my Ph.D.
`
`students go on to work on plasmas either in academia or the semiconductor
`
`industry.
`
`6.
`
`A copy of my latest curriculum vitae (CV) is attached as Appendix A.
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`7.
`
`I have reviewed the specification, claims, and file history of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,805,779 (the “‘779 Patent”) (Ex. 1201). I understand that the ‘779
`
`Patent was filed on March 21, 2003. I understand that, for purposes determining
`
`whether a publication will qualify as prior art, the earliest date that the ‘779 Patent
`
`could be entitled to is March 21, 2003.
`
`8.
`
`I have reviewed the following publications:
`
` 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, pp. 400-409, 1995 (“Mozgrin” (Ex. 1203)).
`
` A. A. Kudryavtsev, et al, Ionization relaxation in a plasma produced by a
`
`pulsed inert-gas discharge, Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys. 28(1), January 1983
`
`(“Kudryavtsev” (Ex. 1204)).
`
` U.S. Patent No. 3,761,836 (“Pinsley” (Ex. 1205)).
`
` U.S. Patent No. 3,514,714 (“Angelbeck” (Ex. 1206)).
`
` U.S. Patent No. 5,753,886 (“Iwamura” (Ex. 1207)).
`
` PCT Pat. Pub. No. WO 83/01349 (“Wells” (Ex. 1214)).
`
` European Pat. Pub. No. EP 0 242 028 (“Lovelock” (Ex. 1215)).
`
`Of these, I understand that only Mozgrin was of record during prosecution of
`
`the ‘779 Patent.
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`9.
`
`I have read and understood each of the above publications. The
`
`disclosure of each of these publications provides sufficient information for
`
`someone to make and use the plasma generation and sputtering processes that are
`
`described in the above publications.
`
`10.
`
`I have considered certain issues from the perspective of a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time the ‘779 Patent application was filed. In my
`
`opinion, a person of ordinary skill in the art for the ‘779 Patent would have found
`
`the ’779 invalid.
`
`11.
`
`I have been retained by Intel Corporation (“Intel” or “Petitioner”) as
`
`an expert in the field of plasma technology. I am being compensated at my normal
`
`consulting rate of $350/hour for my time. My compensation is not dependent on
`
`and in no way affects the substance of my statements in this Declaration.
`
`12.
`
`I have no financial interest in the Petitioner. I similarly have no
`
`financial interest in the ‘779 Patent, and have had no contact with the named
`
`inventor of the ‘779 Patent.
`
`I.
`
`RELEVANT LAW
`13.
`
`I am not an attorney. For the purposes of this declaration, I have been
`
`informed about certain aspects of the law that are relevant to my opinions. My
`
`understanding of the law is as follows:
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`A. Claim Construction
`14.
`I have been informed that claim construction is a matter of law and
`
`that the final claim construction will ultimately be determined by the Board. For
`
`the purposes of my invalidity analysis in this proceeding and with respect to the
`
`prior art, I have applied the broadest reasonable construction of the claim terms as
`
`they would be understood by one skilled in the relevant art.
`
`15.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a claim in inter partes
`
`review is given the “broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification.”
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b). I have also been informed and understand that any claim
`
`term that lacks a definition in the specification is therefore also given a broad
`
`interpretation.
`
`B. Anticipation
`16.
`I have been informed and understand that a patent claim can be
`
`considered to have been anticipated at the time the application was filed. This
`
`means that if all of the requirements of a claim are found in a single prior art
`
`reference, the claim is not patentable. I have also been informed that a U.S. Patent
`
`can incorporate by reference subject matter from another U.S. Patent or Patent
`
`Publication. In such instances, I have been informed that I should consider them to
`
`be a single prior art reference. I further understand that a claim is anticipated by a
`
`reference when all the limitations of the claim are present in a single embodiment
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

`described in the reference, even if there are multiple embodiments disclosed in the
`
`reference.
`
`C. Obviousness
`17.
`I have been informed and understand that a patent claim can be
`
`considered to have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time
`
`the application was filed. This means that, even if all of the requirements of a
`
`claim are not found in a single prior art reference, the claim is not patentable if the
`
`differences between the subject matter in the prior art and the subject matter in the
`
`claim would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time
`
`the application was filed.
`
`18.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a determination of whether
`
`a claim would have been obvious should be based upon several factors, including,
`
`among others:
`
` the level of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed;
`
` the scope and content of the prior art;
`
` what differences, if any, existed between the claimed invention and the
`
`prior art.
`
`19.
`
`I have been informed and understand that the teachings of two or
`
`more references may be combined in the same way as disclosed in the claims, if
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`

`such a combination would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the
`
`art. In determining whether a combination based on either a single reference or
`
`multiple references would have been obvious, it is appropriate to consider, among
`
`other factors:
`
` whether the teachings of the prior art references disclose known concepts
`
`combined in familiar ways, and when combined, would yield predictable
`
`results;
`
` whether a person of ordinary skill in the art could implement a
`
`predictable variation, and would see the benefit of doing so;
`
` whether the claimed elements represent one of a limited number of
`
`known design choices, and would have a reasonable expectation of
`
`success by those skilled in the art;
`
` whether a person of ordinary skill would have recognized a reason to
`
`combine known elements in the manner described in the claim;
`
` whether there is some teaching or suggestion in the prior art to make the
`
`modification or combination of elements claimed in the patent; and
`
` whether the innovation applies a known technique that had been used to
`
`improve a similar device or method in a similar way.
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

`20.
`
`I understand that one of ordinary skill in the art has ordinary
`
`creativity, and is not an automaton.
`
`21.
`
`I understand that in considering obviousness, it is important not to
`
`determine obviousness using the benefit of hindsight derived from the patent being
`
`considered.
`
`II. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF TECHNOLOGY
`A.
`Plasma
`22.
`
` A plasma is a collection of ions, free electrons, and neutral atoms
`
`(including various excited states). The negatively charged free electrons and
`
`positively charged ions are present in roughly equal numbers such that the plasma
`
`as a whole has no overall electrical charge. The “density” of a plasma refers to the
`
`number of ions or electrons that are present in a unit volume. The terms “plasma
`
`density” and “electron density” are often used interchangeably because the
`
`negatively charged free electrons and positively charged ions are present in
`
`roughly equal numbers in plasmas that do not contain negatively charged ions or
`
`clusters.
`
`23. Plasmas had been used in research and industrial applications for
`
`decades before the ‘779 Patent was filed. For example, sputtering is an industrial
`
`process that uses plasmas to deposit a thin film of a target material onto a surface
`
`called a substrate (e.g., silicon wafer during a semiconductor manufacturing
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

`operation). Ions in the plasma strike a target surface causing ejection of a small
`
`amount of target material. The ejected target material then forms a film on the
`
`substrate.
`
`B.
`Ions, excited atoms, and metastable atoms
`24. Atoms have equal numbers of protons and electrons. Each electron
`
`has an associated energy state. If all of an atom’s electrons are at their lowest
`
`possible energy state, the atom is said to be in the “ground state.”
`
`25. On the other hand, if one or more of an atom’s electrons is in a state
`
`that is higher than its lowest possible state, then the atom is said to be an “excited
`
`atom.” A metastable atom is a type of excited atom that is relatively long-lived,
`
`because it cannot transition into the ground state through dipole radiation, i.e.,
`
`through the emission of electromagnetic radiation. See also ‘779 Patent at 7:22-
`
`25 (“The term ‘metastable atoms’ is defined herein to mean excited atoms having
`
`energy levels from which dipole radiation is theoretically forbidden. Metastable
`
`atoms have relatively long lifetimes compared with other excited atoms.”) (Ex.
`
`1201). “All noble gases have metastable states.” ‘779 Patent at 7:37 (Ex. 1201).
`
`26. When generating excited atoms, multiple levels of excited states are
`
`formed. Of these, some of the lowest states are metastable, and would typically be
`
`more common than the higher states. This would be generally known in the field
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

`of plasma physics and sputtering, as indicated for example, in the articles cited at
`
`Exhibits 1211 and 1212. Exhibit 1211 identifies two metastable levels among the
`
`four lowest excited levels of argon. The other two levels are called resonant levels,
`
`since they can transition directly to the ground state through emission of dipole
`
`radiation. However, when they do so, the radiation can be absorbed by any ground
`
`state atom nearby, which in practice happens with very high efficiency. Hence
`
`even though they are not technically metastable (i.e., spin or dipole forbidden),
`
`they have a high population since for every resonant state that decays into the
`
`ground state, another ground state atom nearby is excited into a resonant state.
`
`Hence the excitation was just passed from one atom to the next, which effectively
`
`extends the life-time of the resonant states. Page 624 of Exhibit 1211 identifies the
`
`levels with n=2 and n=4 as metastable. Table 1 shows that these states are among
`
`the four lowest excited states, and, in fact, the n=2 level has the lowest excitation
`
`energy. The levels with n=3 and n=5 are the resonant levels. Exhibit 1212 shows
`
`experimental results and results of the model presented in Exhibit 1211 for argon.
`
`Table 2 shows that some of the conditions shown are for a high density plasmas (ne
`
`> 1x1012 cm-3), and others are for low density plasmas. Figure 5 and 6 show that
`
`the four lowest excited states, called 4s levels, have at least 100 times higher
`
`density than the next higher excited states, called 4p levels (Compare Table 1 in
`
`Exhibit 1212 or in Exhibit 1211). Figure 9 of Exhibit 1212 compares the 4s, n=2
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`

`(metastable) and n=3 (resonant) levels, to some higher states such as 4p, 5p, 5d,
`
`and 7s. It is clear that the population of the 4s lowest excited levels is several
`
`orders of magnitude higher than that of the higher excited levels. Hence if we
`
`assume that the vast majority (e.g. > 95%) of all excited atoms are in one of the 4s
`
`levels, the metastable 4s levels n=2,4 account for at least 50% of all excited atoms,
`
`with the remainder essentially being accounted for by the resonant 4s states n=3,5.
`
`Thus, as indicated above, generating excited atoms means also generating
`
`metastable atoms.
`
`27. Excited and metastable atoms are electrically neutral – they have
`
`equal numbers of electrons and protons. A collision with a low energy free
`
`electron (e-) can convert a ground state atom to an excited or metastable atom.
`
`For example, the ‘779 Patent uses the following equation to describe production of
`
`an excited argon atom, Ar*, from a ground state argon atom, Ar. See ‘779 Patent
`
`at 8:7 (Ex. 1201).
`
`Ar + e-  Ar* + e-
`
`28. An ion is an atom that has become disassociated from one or more of
`
`its electrons. A collision between a free, high energy electron and a ground state,
`
`excited, or metastable atom can create an ion. For example, the ‘779 Patent uses
`
`the following equations to describe production of an argon ion, Ar+, from a ground
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`

`state argon atom, Ar, or an excited argon atom, Ar*. See ‘779 Patent at 3:40 and
`
`8:9 (Ex. 1201).
`
`Ar + e-  Ar+ + 2e-
`
`Ar* + e-  Ar+ + 2e-
`
`29. The production of excited atoms, metastable atoms, and ions was well
`
`understood long before the ‘779 Patent was filed.
`
`III. OVERVIEW OF THE ‘779 PATENT
`A.
`Summary of Alleged Invention of the ‘779 Patent
`30. The ‘779 Patent relates to generating a plasma using a multi-step
`
`ionization process with an excited/metastable atom/molecule source that generates
`
`excited atoms, or metastable atoms, or molecules, and then provides the
`
`excited/metastable atoms or molecules to a plasma chamber where the plasma is
`
`formed, thereby generating a plasma with a “multi-step ionization” process. For
`
`convenience, this section will just use the term “excited atom source.” In any
`
`event, there appears to be no substantial difference between excited and metastable
`
`sources. The ‘779 Patent does not indicate any particular difference in the
`
`operation of an excited atom source when it is a metastable atom source. The
`
`specification repeatedly refers to “an excited atom source such as a metastable
`
`atom source,” see, e.g., ‘779 Patent at 2:13-14, 17-18, 22-24 (Ex. 1201), and says
`
`that “[i]n some embodiments, the metastable atom source 204 generates some
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`

`excited atoms that are in excited states other than a metastable state.” Id. at 5:63-65
`
`(Ex. 1201)
`
`31. Admitted prior art FIG. 1 of the ‘779
`
`Patent shows a plasma chamber consisting of a
`
`magnetron sputtering system, without an excited atom
`
`source. It generates plasma through a process that the
`
`patent refers to as a direct ionization process. ‘779
`
`Patent at 3:36-47 (“The ionization process in known
`
`plasma sputtering apparatus is generally referred to as
`
`direct ionization…. The collision between the neutral argon atom and the ionizing
`
`electron results in an argon ion (Ar+) and two electrons.”) (Ex. 1201).
`
`32. As is generally known, this system has an anode, a cathode assembly
`
`114 for holding a target material to be sputtered, and a magnet 130 that generates a
`
`magnetic field 132 proximate to the target to trap and concentrate electrons. Id. at
`
`2:46-3:18 (Ex. 1201).
`
`33. The alleged invention generally relates to coupling an excited or
`
`metastable atom source to some plasma chamber. ‘779 Patent at 5:27-34 (“The
`
`metastable atom source 204 can be coupled to any type of process chamber, such
`
`as the chamber 104 of FIG. 1. In fact, a plasma generator according to the present
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`

`invention can be constructed by coupling a metastable atom source to a
`
`commercially available plasma chamber. Thus, commercially available plasma
`
`generators can be modified to generate a plasma using a multi-step ionization
`
`process according to the present invention.”) (Ex. 1201).
`
`34. FIGS. 2 and 3 of the ‘779 Patent show such plasma generators
`
`“according to the present invention” that are coupled with separate metastable
`
`atom sources (annotated in color below). ‘779 Patent at 2:3-11; FIGS. 2 and 3 (Ex.
`
`1201).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`35. Specifically, FIG. 2 shows metastable atom source 204, and FIG. 3
`
`shows metastable atom source 304 (annotated in color above). The metastable
`
`atom sources 204 and 304 “generat[e] a volume of metastable atoms 218 from [a]
`
`volume of ground state atoms. See, e.g., ‘779 Patent at 4:56-58 (Ex. 1201).
`
`Metastable atoms 218 are transported from the source where they are generated to
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`

`the region between the cathode 114/306 and substrate support 136/352, where
`
`plasma 202/302 is formed.
`
`36. Power supply 222 (also annotated in color above) provides power to
`
`the metastable atom source. See, e.g., ‘779 Patent at 4:60-62 (Ex. 1201). Another
`
`(pulsed) power supply 201 (in FIG. 2) or power supply 316 (in FIG. 3) raises the
`
`energy of the metastable atoms to generate a plasma 202. See, e.g., id. at 11:4-14
`
`(“A power supply 316 is electrically coupled to the volume of metastable atoms
`
`218. The power supply 316 can be any type of power supply, such as a pulsed
`
`power supply, a RF power supply, an AC power supply, or a DC power supply. …
`
`The power supply 316 generates an electric field 322 between the cathode 306 and
`
`the anode 308 that raises the energy of the volume of metastable atoms 218 so that
`
`at least a portion of the volume of metastable atoms 218 are ionized, thereby
`
`generating the plasma 302.”) (Ex. 1201).
`
`37. The metastable atom sources shown in FIGS. 2 and 3 can be mounted
`
`to the inside wall of the chamber 230 (FIG. 3), or on the outside wall (FIG. 2).
`
`See, e.g., ‘779 Patent at 4:31-34 and 9:51-62 (Ex. 1201).
`
`38. Consistent with the claim language, FIGS. 2 and 3, and the
`
`specification, the “excited atom source” and “metastable atom source” generate the
`
`excited atoms in a source that is distinct from, and coupled to, the components that
`
`- 15 -
`
`

`

`later raise the energy of the excited or metastable atoms to generate a plasma with
`
`“multi-step ionization,” a term the ‘779 Patent defines as “an ionization process
`
`whereby ions are ionized in at least two distinct steps.”1 ‘779 Patent at 6:60-63
`
`(Ex. 1201).
`
`B.
`Prosecution History
`39. The first substantive office action for the application that led to the
`
`‘779 Patent rejected all independent claims as being anticipated based on prior art
`
`that showed a first chamber for generating excited/metastable atoms, and a second
`
`chamber for increasing the energy of the excited atoms, and for generating a
`
`plasma using multi-step ionization. See 02/11/04 Office Action at 2-3 (Ex. 1208).
`
`40. The applicant did not dispute the rejection, but amended the
`
`independent claims at issue here to require that the distinct source further includes
`
`“generating a magnetic field proximate to a volume of ground state atoms
`
`[molecules] to substantially trap electrons proximate to the ground state atoms
`
`[molecules].” See 05/06/04 Resp. at 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 (Ex. 1209). The claims were
`
`then allowed.
`
`41. Notwithstanding this difference in specifying the use of a magnetic
`
`field, the ‘779 Patent does not indicate that an excited atom source with a magnetic
`
`1 All bold/italics emphasis is added.
`
`- 16 -
`
`

`

`field has any special significance over other ways for generating
`
`excited/metastable atoms or molecules. The specification indicates that there were
`
`many ways to generate excited atoms, and shows multiple embodiments – e.g.,
`
`FIGS. 4, 5, 8, 9, and 11—without magnets (although some have coils that could
`
`create magnetic fields). The “magnet” of the source chamber recited in the claims
`
`refers particularly to the embodiments of FIGS. 6, 7, and 10, and specifically to
`
`magnets 504a, 504b, 506a and 506b for generating magnetic fields 508a and 508b
`
`in FIG. 6; magnets 566a-d and 570a-d in FIG. 7; and magnets 712 and 714 in FIG.
`
`10. ‘779 Patent at FIGS. 6 and 7; 14:46-15:45; 16:12-20 (Ex. 1201).
`
`42. European Counterpart. The applicants had also identified these
`
`magnets, located in the excited atom source of FIG. 6, as the claimed magnets in
`
`counterpart claims in Europe, and for generating magnetic fields 508. The claim
`
`read in part:
`
`characterised in that the excited atom source (204) comprises a
`magnet (504, 506) that is arranged to generate a magnetic field (508)
`that traps electrons proximate to the ground state atoms.
`
`24 July 2007 Response in EP 1614136 (Ex. 1210)
`
`43. However, as explained in detail below, and contrary to the Examiner’s
`
`reasons for allowance, the prior art addressed herein teaches using magnets and a
`
`- 17 -
`
`

`

`magnetic field in this manner, along with the other limitations of the challenged
`
`claims.
`
`C. Claims 30 and 40
`44. Claims 30 and 40 are method claims relating to “multi-step
`
`ionization,” a term the ‘779 Patent defines as “an ionization process whereby ions
`
`are ionized in at least two distinct steps.” ‘779 Patent at 6:60-63 (Ex. 1201). The
`
`distinct steps are provided by using a metastable atom (or molecule) source to
`
`generate a plasma with an enhanced level of excited atoms (or molecules), provide
`
`them into a plasma chamber, and then add further energy to create a second high
`
`density plasma from the first initial plasma.
`
`45.
`
`It is generally known that any plasma of the types described in the
`
`‘779 patent will have a combination of ground state atoms, various excited
`
`(neutral) states including metastable states, ions, and electrons. However, the ‘779
`
`patent describes ways to generate distinct volumes of metastable atoms using
`
`magnetic fields, electron ion absorbers, and other means to inhibit ions and
`
`electrons from flowing with a plasma, and thereby causing a distinct volume of
`
`metastable atoms or molecules to pass to the chamber. See, e.g., Figures 6, 8, 9,
`
`10, 11, and 12A-12C (Ex. 1201).
`
`- 18 -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`46. Figures 2 and 6 show examples where the excited atom source
`
`generates a plasma, blocks out at least some of the ions and electrons, and provides
`
`the excited atoms or molecules to the chamber.
`
`47. The ‘779 Patent notes that if ground state atoms are introduced
`
`between the anode and cathode of the plasma chamber and energized, those ground
`
`state atoms will be ionized through direct ionization, and not multi-step ionization
`
`as claimed in claims 30 and 40:
`
`Ground state atoms 326 from the feed gas source 328 are injected in the
`region 324 between the anode 308 and the cathode 306. The metastable
`atoms 218 interact with the ground state atoms 326 in the region 324
`between the anode 308 and the cathode 306. The power supply 316 then
`generates the electric field 322 across the mixture of metastable atoms
`
`- 19 -
`
`

`

`218 and ground state atoms 326. The electric field 322 raises the energy
`of the metastable atoms 218 and ground state atoms 326 so that at least a
`portion of the metastable atoms 218 and the ground state atoms 326 are
`ionized, thereby generating the plasma 302 with a combination of a
`direct ionization process and a multi-step ionization process. In other
`embodiments, the feed gas source 328 contains a molecular gas.”
`‘779 Patent at 12:52-65 (Ex. 1201).
`
`48. Accordingly, the magnetic field that is generated is one that is used to
`
`hold the electrons in the metastable atom source to implement the first step of the
`
`multi-step ionization. The volume of metastable atoms or molecules referred to in
`
`the claims refers to generating an enhanced volume compared to what would be
`
`created in any plasma, with many of the ions and electrons filtered out. The
`
`plasma chamber can then be used (along with a different magnetic field shown in
`
`prior art Figure 1 at 132, or Figure 3 at 346 (Ex. 1201) for raising the energy of the
`
`metastable atoms or molecules for the multi-step ionization.
`
`IV. OVERVIEW OF THE PRIMARY PRIOR ART REFERENCES
`A.
`Summary of the Prior Art
`49. As explained in detail below, limitation-by-limitation, there is nothing
`
`new or non-obvious in the challenged claims of the ‘779 Patent.
`
`- 20 -
`
`

`

`B. Overview of Mozgrin
`50. Fig. 7 of Mozgrin, copied below, shows the current-voltage
`
`characteristic (“CVC”) of a plasma discharge generated by Mozgrin. As shown,
`
`Mozgrin divides this CVC into four distinct
`
`regions.
`
`51. Mozgrin calls region 1 “pre-
`
`ionization.” Mozgrin at 402, right col, ¶ 2
`
`(“Part 1 in the voltage oscillogram represents
`
`the voltage of the stationary discharge (pre-ionization stage).”2) (Ex. 1203).
`
`52. Mozgrin calls region 2 “high current magnetron discharge.” Mozgrin
`
`at 409, left col, ¶ 4 (“The implementation of the high-current magnetron
`
`discharge (regime 2)…”) (Ex. 1203). Application of a high voltage to the pre-
`
`ionized plasma causes the transition from region 1 to 2. Mozgrin teaches that
`
`region 2 is useful for sputtering. Mozgrin at 403, right col, ¶ 4 (“Regime 2 was
`
`characterized by an intense cathode sputtering…”) (Ex. 1203).
`
`53. Mozgrin calls region 3 “high current diffuse discharge.” Mozgrin at
`
`409, left col, ¶ 5, (“The high-current diffuse discharge (regime 3)…”) (Ex. 1203).
`
`Increasing the current applied to the “high-current magnetron discharge” (region 2)
`
`2 All bold/italic emphases are added.
`
`- 21 -
`
`

`

`causes the plasma to transition to region 3. Mozgrin also teaches that region 3 is
`
`useful for etching, i.e., removing material from a surface. Mozgrin at 409, left col,
`
`¶ 5 (“The high-current diffuse discharge (regime 3) is useful … Hence, it can
`
`enhance the efficiency of ionic etching…”)
`
`54. Mozgrin calls region 4 “arc discharge.” Mozgrin at 402, right col, ¶ 3
`
`(“…part 4 corresponds to the high-current low-voltage arc discharge…”) (Ex.
`
`1203). Further increasing the applied current causes the plasma to transition from
`
`region 3 to the “arc discharge” region 4.
`
`C. Overview of Kudryavtsev
`55. Kudryavtsev is a technical paper that studies the ionization of a
`
`plasma with voltage pulses. See, e.g., Kudryavtsev at 30, left col. ¶ 1 (Ex. 1204).
`
`In particular, Kudryavtsev describes how ionization of a plasma can occur via
`
`different processes. The first process is direct ionization, in which ground state
`
`atoms are converted directly to ions. See, e.g., Kudryavtsev at Fig. 6 caption (Ex.
`
`1204). The second process is multi-step ionization, which Kudryavtsev calls
`
`stepwise ionization. See, e.g., Id. (Ex. 1204). Kudryavtsev notes that under certain
`
`conditions multi-step ionization can be the dominant ionization process. See, e.g.,
`
`Id. (Ex. 1204). Mozgrin took into account the teachings of Kudryavtsev when
`
`designing his experiments. Mozgrin at 401, ¶ spanning left and right cols.
`
`- 22 -
`
`

`

`(“Designing the unit, we took into account the dependences which had been
`
`obtained in [Kudryavtsev]…”) (Ex. 1203).
`
`D. Overview of Iwamura
`56.
`Iwamura discloses “a plasma treatment apparatus for treating a
`
`surface of an object…” Iwamura at 2:51-52 (Ex. 1207). “A first plasma
`
`generation unit for preactivating the gas to generate a plasma is positioned
`
`upstream along the flow path of the gas in the gas supply; and a second plasma
`
`generation unit for activating the gas to generate a plasma downstream along the
`
`flow path of the gas in the gas supply is also provided. Thus, the first plasma
`
`generation unit preactivates the gas and the second plasma generation unit activates
`
`the gas and forms activated gas species. Then, the activated gas species formed by
`
`the second plasma generation unit treat the object to be treated.” Iwamura at 2:56-
`
`65. (Ex. 1207).
`
`57.
`
`Iwamura discloses multiple ways for generating excited/metastable
`
`atoms, and discloses the desirability of providing a first excitation step followed by
`
`a further energy step, and also claims such a system. Iwamura at 2:1-50, claim 1
`
`(Ex. 1207).
`
`- 23 -
`
`

`

`E. Overview of Pinsley and Angelbeck
`58. Pinsley discloses a gas laser having a magnetic field that is oriented
`
`transversely with respect to the flow of the gases. Pinsley at Abstract (“A flowing
`
`gas laser having an electric discharge plasma with the electric field oriented
`
`transversely with respect to the flow of gases therethrough is provided with a
`
`magnetic field which is oriented transversely with respect to both the flow and the
`
`electric field to overcome the forces of flowing gases thereon.”) (Ex. 1205). The
`
`transverse magnetic field traps electrons. Pinsley at 2:43-47 (“As is known, the
`
`interaction between the current and the magnetic field will result in an upstream
`
`force as indicated by the force vector 32. This force is exerted upon the electrons,
`
`and tends to maintain the electrons in an area between the anode and cathode.”)
`
`(Ex. 1205).
`
`59. Pinsley does not specifically use the words “excited atoms,” but one
`
`of ordinary skill would understand that increasing the energy and using a magnetic
`
`field to hold the electrons would generate excited atoms. The Angelbeck patent
`
`(with a lead inventor who is also a co-inventor on the Pinsley patent), makes clear
`
`that gas lasers of the type disclosed by Pinsley generate excited atoms as part of
`
`their operation. Angelbeck at 1:21-25 (“This invention relates to gas lasers, and
`
`particularly to a method and apparatus for increasing and controlling the light
`
`output of a gas laser by applying a transverse magnetic field to the laser.”); 2:18-20
`
`- 24 -
`
`

`

`(“A high gas pressure P is advantageous, however, for creating a high density of
`
`excited atoms in the laser.”) (Ex. 1203). Neither Pinsley nor Angelbeck was of
`
`record during the prosecution of the ‘779 Patent.
`
`V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`60.
`I have been informed and understand that a claim in inter partes
`
`review is given the “broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification.”
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b). I have also been informed and understand that any claim
`
`term that lacks a definition in the specification is therefore also given a broad
`
`interpretation. I understand that each of the independent claims in the ‘779 Patent
`
`recite the term “multi-step ionization.” The ‘779 Patent defines this term “to mean
`
`an ionization process whereby ions are ionized in at least two distinct steps.” ‘779
`
`Patent at 6:60-63 (Ex. 1201). This is consistent with the claim language, FIGS. 2
`
`and 3, and the specification, which generate the excited atoms in a source that is
`
`distinct from, and coupled to, the components that later raise the energy of the
`
`excited or metastable atoms to generate a plasma. Therefore, I have used the
`
`following construction: “multi-step ionization” means “an ionization process
`
`whereby ions are ionized in at least two distinct steps.”
`
`- 25 -
`
`

`

`VI. SPECIFIC GROUNDS FOR PETITION
`61. Pursuant to Rule 42.104(b)(4)-(5), the below sections, demonstrate in
`
`detail how the prior art discloses each and every limitation of claims 30-40 of the
`
`‘779 Patent,

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket