`‘779 Patent
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`PATENT:
`
`6,805,779, CLAIMS 16, 28, 41, 42, 45 AND 46
`
`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 16, 28, 41, 42, 45 AND 46 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 -
`
`
`
`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. 1301). 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:
`
`(cid:120) 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. 1303)).
`
`(cid:120) 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. 1304)).
`
`(cid:120) U.S. Patent No. 3,761,836 (“Pinsley” (Ex. 1305)).
`
`(cid:120) U.S. Patent No. 3,514,714 (“Angelbeck” (Ex. 1306)).
`
`(cid:120) U.S. Patent No. 5,753,886 (“Iwamura” (Ex. 1307)).
`
`Of these, I understand that only Mozgrin was of record during prosecution of
`
`the ‘779 Patent.
`
`9.
`
`I have read and understood each of the above publications. The
`
`disclosure of each of these publications provides sufficient information for
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`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:
`
`(cid:120) the level of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed;
`
`(cid:120) the scope and content of the prior art;
`
`(cid:120) 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:
`
`(cid:120) whether the teachings of the prior art references disclose known concepts
`
`combined in familiar ways, and when combined, would yield predictable
`
`results;
`
`(cid:120) whether a person of ordinary skill in the art could implement a
`
`predictable variation, and would see the benefit of doing so;
`
`(cid:120) 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;
`
`(cid:120) whether a person of ordinary skill would have recognized a reason to
`
`combine known elements in the manner described in the claim;
`
`(cid:120) whether there is some teaching or suggestion in the prior art to make the
`
`modification or combination of elements claimed in the patent; and
`
`(cid:120) 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.
`
`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.1
`
`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
`
`1 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.
`
`- 8 -
`
`
`
`called a substrate (e.g., silicon wafer during a semiconductor manufacturing
`
`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.
`
`1301). “All noble gases have metastable states.” ‘779 Patent at 7:37 (Ex. 1301).
`
`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 of
`
`- 9 -
`
`
`
`plasma physics and sputtering, as indicated for example, in the articles cited at
`
`Exhibits 1311 and 1312. Exhibit 1311 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 1311 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 1312 shows
`
`experimental results and results of the model presented in Exhibit 1311 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 1312 or in Exhibit 1311). Figure 9 of Exhibit 1312 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.
`
`26. 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. 1301).
`
`Ar + e- (cid:198) Ar* + e-
`
`27. 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. 1301).
`
`Ar + e- (cid:198) Ar+ + 2e-
`
`Ar* + e- (cid:198) Ar+ + 2e-
`
`28. 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
`29. The ‘779 Patent relates to generating a plasma using a multi-step
`
`ionization process with an excited/metastable atom source that generates excited
`
`atoms or metastable atoms, and then provides the excited/metastable atoms 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.” 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. 1301),
`
`and says that “[i]n some embodiments, the metastable atom source 204 generates
`
`some excited atoms that are in excited states other than a metastable state.” Id. at
`
`5:63-65 (Ex. 1301)
`
`- 12 -
`
`
`
`30. 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. 1301).
`
`31. 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. 1301).
`
`32. 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
`
`invention can be constructed by coupling a metastable atom source to a
`
`- 13 -
`
`
`
`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. 1301).
`
`33. 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.
`
`1301). Specifically, FIG. 2 shows metastable atom source 204, and FIG. 3 shows
`
`metastable atom source 304 (annotated in color below).
`
`34. The metastable atom sources 204 and 304 “generate[] a volume of
`
`
`
`
`
`metastable atoms 218 from [a] volume of ground state atoms. See, e.g., ‘779
`
`Patent at 4:56-58 (Ex. 1301). Metastable atoms 218 are transported from the
`
`source where they are generated to the region between the cathode 114/306 and
`
`substrate support 136/352, where plasma 202/302 is formed.
`
`- 14 -
`
`
`
`35. 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. 1301). 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. 1301).
`
`36. 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. 1301).
`
`37. 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
`
`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
`
`- 15 -
`
`
`
`whereby ions are ionized in at least two distinct steps.”2, 3 ‘779 Patent at 6:60-63
`
`(Ex. 1301).
`
`B.
`Prosecution History
`38. 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. 1308).
`
`39. The applicant did not dispute the rejection, but amended the
`
`independent claims at issue here to require that the distinct source further includes
`
`“a magnet that generates a magnetic field for substantially trapping electrons
`
`proximate to the ground state atoms.” See 05/06/04 Resp. at 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 (Ex.
`
`1309). The claims were then allowed.
`
`40. Notwithstanding this difference, the ‘779 Patent does not indicate that
`
`an excited atom source with magnets has any special significance over other
`
`energy sources for generating excited/metastable. For example, the ‘779 Patent
`
`2 All bold/italics emphasis is added.
`
` It would be more accurate to say that ground state atoms are ionized, but this
`
` 3
`
`language is from the ‘779 patent specification.
`
`- 16 -
`
`
`
`specification indicates that there were approximately twelve (12) different ways to
`
`generate excited atoms – see ‘779 Patent at 19:1-10 (Ex. 1301) - and shows
`
`multiple embodiments – e.g., FIGS. 4, 5, 8, 9 and 11—without the magnets that
`
`were required for the claims to be allowed. 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 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; 14:46-15:4516:12-20 (Ex. 1301).
`
`41. European Counterpart. The applicant had also identified these
`
`magnets, located in the separate excited atom source of FIG. 6, as the claimed
`
`magnets in counterpart claims in Europe. Those claims read in part “characterised
`
`[sic] 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. 1310).
`
`42. However, as explained in detail below, and contrary to the Examiner’s
`
`reasons for allowance, the prior art addressed in this Petition teaches using magnets
`
`in this manner, along with the other limitations of the challenged claims.
`
`IV. OVERVIEW OF THE PRIMARY PRIOR ART REFERENCES
`A.
`Summary of the Prior Art
`
`- 17 -
`
`
`
`43. As explained in detail below, limitation-by-limitation, there is nothing
`
`new or non-obvious in the challenged claims of the ‘779 Patent.
`
`B. Overview of Mozgrin
`44. 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.
`
`45. 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).”) (Ex. 1303).
`
`46. 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. 1303). 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. 1303).
`
`- 18 -
`
`
`
`47. Mozgrin calls region 3 “high current diffuse discharge.” Mozgrin at
`
`409, left col, ¶ 5, (“The high-current diffuse discharge (regime 3)…”) (Ex. 1303).
`
`Increasing the current applied to the “high-current magnetron discharge” (region 2)
`
`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…”) (Ex. 1303).
`
`C. Overview of Kudryavtsev
`48. 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. 1304).
`
`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., id. at Fig. 6 caption (Ex. 1304).
`
`The second process is multi-step ionization, which Kudryavtsev calls stepwise
`
`ionization. See, e.g., id. (Ex. 1304). Kudryavtsev notes that under certain
`
`conditions multi-step ionization can be the dominant ionization process. See, e.g.,
`
`id. (Ex. 1304). Mozgrin took into account the teachings of Kudryavtsev when
`
`designing his experiments. Mozgrin at 401, ¶ spanning left and right cols.
`
`(“Designing the unit, we took into account the dependences which had been
`
`obtained in [Kudryavtsev]….”) (Ex. 1303).
`
`- 19 -
`
`
`
`D. Overview of Iwamura
`49.
`Iwamura discloses “a plasma treatment apparatus for treating a
`
`surface of an object….” Iwamura at 2:51-52 (Ex. 1307). “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. 1307).
`
`50.
`
`
`
`Iwamura discloses multiple ways for generating
`
`excited/metastable atoms, and discloses the desirability of providing a first
`
`excitation step followed by a further energy providing step, and also claims such a
`
`system. Iwamura at 2:1-50, claim 1 (Ex. 1307).
`
`E. Overview of Pinsley and Angelbeck
`51. 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
`
`- 20 -
`
`
`
`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. 1305). 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. 1305).
`
`52. 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 “maintain the electrons in place would allow excited atoms to be generated
`
`and pass through. 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 (“A high gas pressure P is
`
`advantageous, however, for creating a high density of excited atoms in the laser.”)
`
`(Ex. 1303).
`
`- 21 -
`
`
`
`V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`53.
`I 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
`
`also understand that any claim term that lacks a definition in the specification is
`
`therefore also given a broad interpretation. In re ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 496
`
`F.3d 1374, 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2007). The following discussion proposes
`
`constructions of and support therefore of those terms. Any claim terms not
`
`included in the following discussion are to be given their broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation in light of the specification as commonly understood by those of
`
`ordinary skill in the art.
`
`A.
` “multi-step ionization” (claims 16, 28, 41, 42, 45 and 46)
`54. 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. 1301). 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. Thus, the proposed construction for
`
`- 22 -
`
`
`
`“multi-step ionization” is “an ionization process whereby ions are ionized in at
`
`least two distinct steps.” 4
`
`B.
`
`“means for generating a magnetic field proximate to a volume of
`ground state atoms to substantially trap electrons proximate to
`the volume of ground state atoms” (claims 41 and 42)
`55. Claim 41 recites “means for generating a magnetic field proximate to
`
`a volume of ground state atoms to substantially trap electrons proximate to the
`
`volume of ground state atoms.” The claimed function is: “generating a magnetic
`
`field in a volume of ground state atoms separate from the plasma chamber to trap
`
`electrons.”
`
`56. The ‘779 Patent discloses at least the following corresponding
`
`structure for the “means for generating a magnetic field…” limitation of claim 41:
`
`magnets (556a-d, 570a-d, 712, 714) that generate a magnetic field as described in
`
`the text of ‘779 Patent at 16:1-20 and 18:34-41, and as shown in FIGS. 7, 7A and
`
`10. (Ex. 1301)
`
`
`4 It would be more accurate to say that ground state atoms are ionized, but this
`
`language is taken from the ‘779 patent specification.
`
`- 23 -
`
`
`
`C.
`
`“means for generating a volume of metastable atoms from the
`volume of ground state atoms” (claims 41 and 42)
`57. Claim 41 recites “means for generating a volume of metastable atoms
`
`from the volume of ground state atoms.” The claimed function is: “creating a
`
`volume of atoms comprising a majority of metastable atoms.”
`
`58. The ‘779 Patent discloses at least the following corresponding
`
`structure for the “means for generating a volume of metastable atoms…” limitation
`
`of claim 41: Any of the separate metastable atom sources (402, 450, 500, 550,
`
`600, 650, 700, 735) disclosed in FIGS. 4-11 and as described in the text of the ‘779
`
`Patent at 14:24-26, 14:46-48, 15:46-67, 16:29-31, 17:27-34, 18:7-16 and 19:11-12.
`
`(Ex. 1301).
`
`D.
`
` “means for raising an energy of the metastable atoms so that at
`least a portion of the volume of metastable atoms is ionized”
`(claims 41 and 42)
`59. Claim 41 recites “means for raising an energy of the metastable atoms
`
`so that at least a portion of the volume of metastable atoms is ionized.” The
`
`claimed function is: “raising an energy of the metastable atoms so that at least a
`
`portion of the volume of metastable atoms is ionized.”
`
`60. The ‘779 Patent discloses at least the following corresponding
`
`structure for the “means for raising an energy of the metastable atoms…”
`
`limitation of claim 41: power supply 201 generating an electric field 150 between
`
`- 24 -
`
`
`
`cathode assembly 114 and anode 124 shown in FIG. 2 as described in the text of
`
`the ‘779 Patent at 8:39-51; or power supply 316 generating an electric field 322
`
`between the cathode 306 and the anode 308 shown in FIG. 3 as described in the
`
`text of the ‘779 Patent at 11:4-14. (Ex. 1301). The “means for raising…” is
`
`positioned to receive metastable atoms from the “means for generating a volume of
`
`metastable atoms…”
`
`E.
`
`“means for trapping electrons and ions in the volume of
`metastable atoms” (claim 42)
`61. Claim 42 recites “means for trapping electrons and ions in the volume
`
`of metastable atoms.” The claimed function is “preventing electrons and ions from
`
`passing into a plasma chamber.”
`
`62. The ‘779 Patent discloses at least the following corresponding
`
`structure for the “means for trapping electrons and ions…” of claim 42: Electron
`
`ion/absorbers 536, 618, 664, 728, 750, 750’ and 750’’ as described in the text of
`
`the ‘