Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper No. 35
`Entered: July 14, 2015
`
`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.
`____________
`
`Cases IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`
`Cases IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805
`(Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`____________
`
`Held: June 8, 2015
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper No. 35
`Entered: July 14, 2015
`
`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.
`____________
`
`Cases IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`
`Cases IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805
`(Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`____________
`
`Held: June 8, 2015
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`
`BEFORE: KEVIN F. TURNER, DEBRA K. STEPHENS,
`JONI Y. CHANG, SUSAN L.C. MITCHELL, and
`JENNIFER MEYER CHAGNON, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER (TOSHIBA):
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ROBINSON VU, ESQ.
`Baker Botts, L.L.P.
`One Shell Plaza
`910 Louisiana Street
`Houston, Texas 77002-4995
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER (GLOBAL FOUNDRIES):
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DAVID M. TENNANT, ESQ.
`BRETT C. RISMILLER, ESQ.
`White & Case LLP
`701 Thirteenth Street, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20005
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER (ADVANCE MICRO
`DEVICES):
`
`
`
`
`
`
`XIN-YI (VINCENT) ZHOU, ESQ.
`O'Melveny & Myers LLP
`400 South Hope Street
`Los Angeles, California 90071-1899
`
` 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER (FUJITSU):
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER (RENESAS):
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DAVID L. McCOMBS, ESQ.
`Haynes and Boone, LLP
`2323 Victory Avenue, Suite 700
`Dallas, Texas 75219
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PAVAN K. AGARWAL, ESQ.
`Foley & Lardner LLP
`3000 K Street, N.W., Suite 600
`Washington, DC 20007-5109
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ON BEHALF OF PATENT OWNER:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BRUCE J. BARKER, ESQ.
`GREGORY GONSALVES, ESQ.
`Chao Hadidi Stark & Barker LLP
`176 East Main Street, Suite 6
`Westborough, Massachusetts 01581
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The above-entitled matter came on for hearing on Monday,
`June 8, 2015, commencing at 10:00 a.m., at the U.S. Patent and
`Trademark Office, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia.
`
`
`
`1
`
` 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` P R O C E E D I N G S
`
`- - - - -
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Good morning. Please be seated.
`
`Good morning. Thank you for the information this morning. We
`
`got your email.
`
`MR. BARKER: Oh, thank you.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: At this time I would like to have the
`
`counsel to introduce yourselves and the colleagues, beginning
`
`1
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`with the Petitioner.
`
`11
`
`MR. VU: Thank you, Your Honor. My name is
`
`12
`
`Robinson Vu with the law firm of Baker Botts, and I represent the
`
`13
`
`lead Petitioner, Toshiba.
`
`14
`
`15
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Thank you.
`
`MR. TENNANT: My name is David Tennant with
`
`16
`
`White & Case, I represent Global Foundries, and here with me is
`
`17
`
`Brett Rismiller, also with White & Case.
`
`18
`
`MR. VU: Your Honor, I apologize, with me I have two
`
`19
`
`clients from Toshiba, Mr. Ishibashi and Ms. Yamanaka.
`
`20
`
`21
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Welcome, thank you.
`
`MR. McCOMBS: David McCombs for Fujitsu, with
`
`22
`
`Haynes and Boone. Thank you.
`
`23
`
`MR. AGARWAL: Pavan Agarwal with Foley &
`
`24
`
`Lardner for the Renesas entities.
`
` 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`
`MR. ZHOU: Xin-Yi Zhou for Petitioner Advanced
`
`Micro Devices, I'm with the law firm O'Melveny & Myers.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Thank you, very much. And for
`
`Patent Owner?
`
`MR. BARKER: Good morning, Your Honor, Bruce
`
`Barker from Chao, Hadidi, Stark & Barker for the Patent Owner
`
`Zond.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Welcome back.
`
`MR. GONSALVES: My name is Greg Gonsalves also
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`for Patent Owner Zond.
`
`11
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Okay, thank you. This is an oral
`
`12
`
`hearing for all cases, IPR2014-00781, 782, 1083, 1086 and 1087,
`
`13
`
`involving patent 7,147,759 B2, as well as for the three IPRs
`
`14
`
`IPR2014-00800, 802, 805 involving patent 7,811,421. The
`
`15
`
`transcript for this consolidated oral hearing will be entered into
`
`16
`
`each of the proceedings, and it will be usable for all cases.
`
`17
`
`Consistent with our previous order for each involved patent, each
`
`18
`
`party has one hour to present its arguments. Petitioner bears the
`
`19
`
`burden of proof that the claims at issue are unpatentable;
`
`20
`
`therefore, Petitioner will proceed first to present its case as to the
`
`21
`
`challenged claims as to the first involved patent. Petitioner may
`
`22
`
`reserve rebuttal time, thereafter the Patent Owner will respond to
`
`23
`
`the Petitioners' case. After the parties' presentation for the first
`
` 5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`involved patent, we will take a lunch break, and the hearing will
`
`resume at 1:30 for the second patent.
`
`So, at this time, I would like to ask that counsel, do you
`
`have a copy of the demonstratives for the court reporter and the
`
`panel?
`
`MR. VU: Yes.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Please. Counsel for Petitioner, you
`
`may start whenever you like.
`
`MR. VU: Thank you. So, Your Honors, my name
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`again is Robinson Vu and I represent lead Petitioner, Toshiba, on
`
`11
`
`behalf of the other Petitioners as well.
`
`12
`
`JUDGE CHANG: I would like to interrupt you just a
`
`13
`
`moment and just double check with my remote judges to see if
`
`14
`
`they can hear. Judge Turner, Judge Stephens, can you hear us?
`
`15
`
`Hello?
`
`16
`
`17
`
`JUDGE STEPHENS: Yes, I can hear you.
`
`JUDGE TURNER: I can hear you, Judge Chang, I can
`
`18
`
`hear the parties. If you can remind the parties also to refer to
`
`19
`
`their demonstrative slides, that's also helpful, thank you.
`
`20
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Okay, that would be great. I don't
`
`21
`
`think I can hear Judge Stephens. Can you speak and see if we can
`
`22
`
`hear you?
`
`23
`
`JUDGE STEPHENS: Yes, can you hear me now?
`
` 6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Oh, yeah, great, thank you very
`
`much.
`
`JUDGE STEPHENS: Thank you.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Just speak up any time if you can't
`
`hear us, I know last time one of our microphones wasn't working
`
`correctly. So, thank you.
`
`JUDGE STEPHENS: Yes. Thank you.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Sorry for the interruption.
`
`MR. VU: No problem, thank you, Your Honor.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`So, this is an overview slide 2 of Petitioners' discussion
`
`11
`
`today and we're going to start with an overview of the '421 patent,
`
`12
`
`the grounds instituted, the overview of the prior art, primarily the
`
`13
`
`Wang reference that we're all familiar with, and then we'll discuss
`
`14
`
`the actual disputes between the parties as to the independent
`
`15
`
`claims and then the dependent claims. And, Your Honor, we
`
`16
`
`would like to reserve 10 minutes for rebuttal time.
`
`17
`
`18
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Sure. Okay.
`
`MR. VU: So, we have the '421 patent, issued in 2010,
`
`19
`
`titled high deposition rate sputtering. We pulled out a
`
`20
`
`representative figure, one of the embodiments, slide 4, and
`
`21
`
`highlighted some of the various hardware features, and we will
`
`22
`
`get back to those in a moment.
`
`23
`
`Claim 1, Your Honor, we submit, is representative of all
`
`24
`
`of the independent claims in this patent, and I think it's important
`
` 7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`to go through it quickly, as a preview for the rest of the
`
`presentation. So, claim 1 recites: (a) sputtering source
`
`comprising a cathode assembly comprising a sputtering target
`
`that is adjacent to an anode; and (b), a power supply that
`
`generates a voltage pulse between the anode and cathode
`
`assembly that creates a weakly-ionized plasma, but then a
`
`strongly-ionized plasma from the weakly-ionized plasma without
`
`an occurrence of arcing between the anode and cathode assembly;
`
`an amplitude, a duration and a rise time of the voltage pulse being
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`chosen to increase the density of ions in the strongly-ionized
`
`11
`
`plasma. This is in reference to slide 5.
`
`12
`
`The Board instituted the IPRs on all claims of the '421
`
`13
`
`patent. The grounds of institution are summarized here on slide
`
`14
`
`6. The primary reference for all of the rejections is the Wang
`
`15
`
`reference, and we've pulled out Figure 1 from the Wang reference
`
`16
`
`and done the same, the highlighting of relevant features.
`
`17
`
`And here we show in slide 8 the embodiment of the
`
`18
`
`sputtering chamber on the left of the '421 patent, Figure 4, and
`
`19
`
`Figure 1 of the Wang reference. We point out the anode in both
`
`20
`
`the cathode assembly, the pulse power supply, magnets, the areas
`
`21
`
`in which the plasma is generated, the feed gas source, the
`
`22
`
`substrate, and the bias power supply.
`
`23
`
`As to the independent claims, Your Honor, there are
`
`24
`
`three disputes between the parties. These relate to claims 1, 17,
`
` 8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`34 and 46 through 48. This is slide 9. The first dispute is
`
`whether Wang discloses a voltage pulse for creating
`
`weakly-ionized plasma and then a strongly-ionized plasma from
`
`the weakly-ionized plasma. The second is whether Wang
`
`discloses without an occurrence of arcing. And the third is
`
`whether Wang discloses an amplitude, a duration and a rise time
`
`of the voltage pulse being chosen to increase the density of ions
`
`in the strongly-ionized plasma. Let's start with the first dispute.
`
`Before we get to that, there were only two terms that
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`were construed by the Board and they're not in dispute,
`
`11
`
`"weakly-ionized plasma" and "strongly-ionized plasma." Two
`
`12
`
`other terms are in dispute as a result of the briefing. The first is
`
`13
`
`raised by Patent Owner, they're disputing the construction of
`
`14
`
`"creates a weakly-ionized plasma and then a strongly-ionized
`
`15
`
`plasma from the weakly-ionized plasma." And the second relates
`
`16
`
`to the meaning of "pulse."
`
`17
`
`For the construction of "creates a weakly-ionized
`
`18
`
`plasma" --
`
`19
`
`JUDGE CHANG: I would like to interrupt you to just
`
`20
`
`remind you to say the slide number for the record and also for the
`
`21
`
`remote judges.
`
`22
`
`MR. VU: Correct, thank you. So, I'm on slide 11 now,
`
`23
`
`I was previously on slide 10. Slide 10 related to the claim
`
`24
`
`construction disputes. Slide 11 will go into the details of the first
`
` 9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`dispute, wherein the Patent Owner is trying to construe a voltage
`
`pulse that creates a weakly-ionized plasma and then a
`
`strongly-ionized plasma without an occurrence of arcing. Patent
`
`Owner is asking the Board to construe that to require that it
`
`means the ignition of a gas from a state in which there is no
`
`plasma to a state in which a plasma exists. And we would
`
`submit, Your Honor, that that construction is improper. Primarily
`
`because in slide 12, it excludes an embodiment in the '421 patent
`
`that's completely consistent with the claim language. The
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`creation of a weakly-ionized plasma is not confined to the initial
`
`11
`
`ignition of the plasma.
`
`12
`
`The embodiment I'm talking about is discussed in
`
`13
`
`column 16 of the '421 patent, and we're familiar, Your Honors,
`
`14
`
`I'm going to skip ahead, I apologize, to slide 15, just to show the
`
`15
`
`wave form disclosed in the '421 patent, on the right side of slide
`
`16
`
`15.
`
`17
`
`18
`
`And we see the weakly-ionized plasma is generated
`
`between time T1 and time T5, and then a high-powered pulse is
`
`19
`
`applied, the high-powered pulse generates a strongly-ionized
`
`20
`
`plasma. At the end of the high-powered pulse, we go back down
`
`21
`
`again to 352, to the lower power region, where weakly-ionized
`
`22
`
`plasma is created again. That's confirmed by our expert
`
`23
`
`testimony. The '421 patent describes it, I'm going back down to
`
`24
`
`slide 12, in the text as the "continuously generated power
`
` 10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`maintains the pre-ionization condition in the plasma while the
`
`pulse power supply 234 prepares to deliver another high-power
`
`pulse."
`
`So we have, of course, the '421 patent, Your Honor, is it
`
`illustrates a single pulse, and it discusses that that pulse can be
`
`repeated. And in between the repetitions, they've creating
`
`weakly-ionized plasma. That's completely consistent with the
`
`claim language and inconsistent with the Patent Owner's
`
`proposed construction to create only related to the initial addition
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`of the plasma.
`
`11
`
`As for pulse, the Patent Owner disputes that Wang
`
`12
`
`discloses a voltage pulse, but importantly, they refuse to construe
`
`13
`
`what "pulse" means. We've supplied a construction of our view
`
`14
`
`of "pulse" and we believe, Your Honor, that it's consistent with
`
`15
`
`the way it's used in the '421 patent.
`
`16
`
`I deposed Patent Owner's expert on this issue,
`
`17
`
`Dr. Hartsough, and I asked him, I tried to get at his understanding
`
`18
`
`of what a pulse is, in the context of the '421 patent, and clearly,
`
`19
`
`and I've excerpted his testimony here, he refused to give us an
`
`20
`
`answer. I asked, "Question: Can you tell me what pulse means
`
`21
`
`to you in relation to the '421 patent?
`
`22
`
`"Answer: I don't think I can give you a definition of it.
`
`23
`
`As I said, as it's used here, I understand what it means.
`
` 11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`
`"Question: Okay. What's your understanding of what it
`
`means?
`
`"Answer: In the context of these patents, it's pretty
`
`clear what it means.
`
`"Question: If it's clear, Dr. Hartsough, I would like you
`
`to tell me what it means.
`
`"Answer: I am not going to -- I am not going to try to
`
`come up with a definitive definition of the word as it's used. To a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art, it's clear what it means."
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`This is slide 14. So, we had repeated questions about
`
`11
`
`the meaning of "pulse," the Patent Owner refused to provide an
`
`12
`
`answer as to what it means, and the reason, Your Honor, I think is
`
`13
`
`clear, they are unable to come up with a construction of "pulse"
`
`14
`
`that distinguishes what's disclosed in the '421 patent from what's
`
`15
`
`disclosed in the Wang reference. They're simply identical wave
`
`16
`
`forms, identical voltage pulses, and there's no distinction between
`
`17
`
`the two.
`
`18
`
`So, the first dispute, that takes us into the first dispute,
`
`19
`
`whether Wang discloses a voltage pulse for creating a
`
`20
`
`weakly-ionized plasma and then a strongly-ionized plasma from
`
`21
`
`the weakly-ionized plasma.
`
`22
`
`We've repeated on slide 17 Figure 7 from the Wang
`
`23
`
`reference that illustrates the power supply in Wang, and in no
`
`24
`
`uncertain terms, the Specification of Wang states "the pulse DC
`
` 12
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`power supply 80 produces a train of negative voltage pulses."
`
`Wang produces voltage pulses.
`
`Slide 18, slide 18 is an excerpt from Wang where he
`
`discusses that the low-power PB creates the weakly-ionized
`
`plasma, and then the application of the high power pulse TP
`
`quickly causes the already existing plasma, the weakly-ionized
`
`plasma, to spread and increases the density of the plasma. So,
`
`Wang discloses a voltage pulse that creates a strongly-ionized
`
`plasma from the weakly-ionized plasma.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`The second dispute in the independent claims is whether
`
`11
`
`Wang discloses an occurrence of arcing. The only description in
`
`12
`
`the '421 patent of arcing is this two-sentence excerpt we've
`
`13
`
`repeated on slide 20. "As described herein, the formation of the
`
`14
`
`weakly-ionized plasma 262 substantially eliminates the
`
`15
`
`possibility of creating a breakdown condition when high-power
`
`16
`
`pulses are applied to the weakly-ionized plasma 262. The
`
`17
`
`suppression of this breakdown condition substantially eliminates
`
`18
`
`the occurrence of undesirable arcing between the anode and the
`
`19
`
`cathode assembly 216."
`
`20
`
`What Wang is talking -- excuse me, what the '421
`
`21
`
`patent is talking about with respect to without an occurrence of
`
`22
`
`arcing is first creating a weakly-ionized plasma in the chamber.
`
`23
`
`We've created this weakly-ionized plasma, and what that does is
`
`24
`
`it creates a condition in which when a strongly -- when the
`
` 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`high-power pulses are applied, the strongly-ionized plasma is
`
`created without arcing. That's what the '421 patent means when it
`
`talks about without an occurrence of arcing. Arcing being
`
`substantially eliminated, or not occurring, when high-power
`
`pulses are applied to a weakly-ionized plasma.
`
`We would submit, Your Honor, that Wang discloses the
`
`exact same thing. The exact same thing. On slide 21, we broke it
`
`out, the syllogism in Wang, he starts out by recognizing that
`
`during initial arcing, there's a tendency to generate initial particles
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`during arcing, okay? Then he says, "my solution to this is
`
`11
`
`provide a background power, a low-power PB between pulses to
`
`12
`
`create this weakly-ionized plasma." And once he's done that, he
`
`13
`
`says, "the initial plasma ignition needs to be performed only once
`
`14
`
`and at much lower power levels." So he's creating that
`
`15
`
`weakly-ionized plasma, you only ignite it once, and then the
`
`16
`
`particulates produced by arcing are much reduced.
`
`17
`
`So, creates is that same weakly-ionized plasma
`
`18
`
`embodiment, and then he later discloses, I will get to this in
`
`19
`
`subsequent slides, that the application of the high-power pulses in
`
`20
`
`slide 22, no arcing is occurring during the application of the
`
`21
`
`strongly-ionized -- excuse me, no arcing is occurring during the
`
`22
`
`application of the high-power to create the strongly-ionized
`
` 14
`
`23
`
`plasma.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`
`And how do we know that? We know that because we
`
`have this quote here that the impedance is changing very little
`
`between the power levels PB and PP. Again, power equals voltage
`
`squared divided by the impedance. If we've got a constant power
`
`and we've got a constant impedance, we've got a constant voltage
`
`in the chamber and there is no high current occurring, which
`
`means that there's no arcing occurring.
`
`Zond's expert agrees that if we've got impedance
`
`changing very little, between these pulses, it's indicative of no
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`unipolar arc. Petitioners' expert agrees, in his Declaration, he
`
`11
`
`cites to the chamber impedance changing very little. His
`
`12
`
`conclusion is that no arcing is occurring, arcing is avoided during
`
`13
`
`the creation of the strongly-ionized plasma. The last dispute as to
`
`14
`
`the independent claims is whether Wang discloses an amplitude,
`
`15
`
`a duration and a rise time of the voltage pulse being chosen to
`
`16
`
`increase a density of ions in the strongly-ionized plasma. This is
`
`17
`
`slide 25. I'm on slide 26.
`
`18
`
`So, there's no dispute that Wang discloses a wave form
`
`19
`
`with an amplitude, a duration and a rise time, that wave form
`
`20
`
`generates a strongly-ionized plasma. Patent Owner's sole dispute
`
`21
`
`is whether those parameters are chosen by Wang to do that. And
`
`22
`
`I think Judge Turner raised this issue in the '184 hearing, there's
`
`23
`
`plenty of case law, Your Honor, that says that the state of mind of
`
`24
`
`the Patent Owner is irrelevant as a limitation to the claim.
`
` 15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`Whether you choose it or not, if it does what's claimed, it's
`
`disclosed and unpatentable. And we would submit that's what's
`
`going on here.
`
`In any event, even if chosen means that Wang has to
`
`choose it, we would submit, Your Honor, that Wang chooses
`
`those various parameters.
`
`Slide 27, again, we have the power supply of Wang. He
`
`discloses that he chooses a voltage pulse. Slide 28, we have the
`
`wave form of Wang shown in Figure 6, it has clearly an
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`amplitude, and Wang discusses that PP can be multiple times PB,
`
`11
`
`he says it can be 10 or 100 or 1,000 times, so he clearly discusses
`
`12
`
`and shows an amplitude of a wave form.
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`JUDGE CHANG: But, counsel?
`
`MR. VU: Yes, Your Honor?
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Doesn't the Patent Owner distinguish
`
`16
`
`power pulse from voltage pulse and Figure 6 of Wang is power
`
`17
`
`pulse?
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`MR. VU: Yes, Your Honor.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Okay.
`
`MR. VU: Let me go back to slide 27. At slide 27,
`
`21
`
`Wang discloses that it's applying negative voltage pulses. It's
`
`22
`
`also disclosed above the highlighted area, that we have a constant
`
`23
`
`negative voltage being applied by 100, so voltage is being
`
`24
`
`applied, Your Honor. What Wang did -- what Wang does,
`
` 16
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`though, is he chooses to graph power. He discloses applying
`
`voltage, he chooses to graph power and I think he does that
`
`because when he graphs Figure 4, which is a different
`
`embodiment, he talks about when you have high impedance
`
`changing, it's desirable to characterize power, and so he graphs
`
`power in a high impedance changing environment and then I
`
`think to be consistent with what he's done in Figure 4, he shows
`
`Figure 6, the power characteristic, but he clearly discloses that
`
`voltage is being applied.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`JUDGE CHANG: I guess I'm trying to initiate a little
`
`11
`
`bit more. So, you say you have a power source, right, in Wang,
`
`12
`
`so it's 80, item 80, pulse of a power supply, right?
`
`13
`
`14
`
`MR. VU: Yes, Your Honor.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: And what comes out of that is the
`
`15
`
`voltage pulse. So, where does Wang measure that power pulse to
`
`16
`
`graph Figure 6?
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`that?
`
`MR. VU: Where does the --
`
`JUDGE CHANG: After the filter or 104, or before
`
`20
`
`MR. VU: Your Honor, if I understand correctly, so I'm
`
`21
`
`looking at Figure 7 on slide 30 and what we have is pulse DC
`
`22
`
`power supply 80 and you can see the wave form coming out of
`
`23
`
`that.
`
`24
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Yes, that's a voltage pulse.
`
` 17
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`
`MR. VU: That's a voltage pulse and it goes through a
`
`high-pass filter, so it's letting in the higher frequency voltage
`
`pulses and then what's applied to the chamber is after the
`
`high-pass filter, and it's still a voltage pulse, it's just been filtered
`
`out, and then you have this voltage source 100.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Yes, but that's a -- in the
`
`background.
`
`MR. VU: Yes, yes, and it goes through a low-pass filter
`
`and then the combined wave form comes out and it looks like
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`Figure 6.
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Okay.
`
`MR. VU: And he's illustrating power.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Okay.
`
`MR. VU: That's what's illustrated, but clearly, Your
`
`15
`
`Honor, just because there's a direct relationship to power equals
`
`16
`
`voltage squared divided by impedance, that the wave form -- that
`
`17
`
`there is a voltage wave form, he doesn't show it, and then, Your
`
`18
`
`Honor, again, the impedance -- Wang says that the impedance in
`
`19
`
`this environment, once we've created the weakly-ionized plasma,
`
`20
`
`before time zero, before the time that starts on the graph at Figure
`
`21
`
`6 --
`
`22
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Wang said that that impedance is the
`
`23
`
`chamber impedance, right?
`
`24
`
`MR. VU: Yes. Yes.
`
` 18
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`
`JUDGE CHANG: So, let me ask again, where is the
`
`power? Where is being measured the power on the pulse of
`
`Wang? Of 6? See, here in Figure 6 --
`
`MR. VU: This is the perspective, Your Honor, if I
`
`understand correctly, Your Honor.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Okay.
`
`MR. VU: Again on slide 30, the wave form in Figure 6
`
`is from the perspective of I would say point 106.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Um-hmm. Okay.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`MR. VU: So, it's from that perspective. It's not a -- it's
`
`11
`
`not an empirical measurement of the chamber. Does that make
`
`12
`
`sense?
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Okay. If that's what your position is.
`
`MR. VU: Let me confer with my colleagues.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Okay. I just want to know your
`
`16
`
`position.
`
`17
`
`MR. VU: Okay, Your Honor, if we look at column 7,
`
`18
`
`line 56 of Wang.
`
`19
`
`20
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Okay.
`
`MR. VU: As best we can tell it says that the
`
`21
`
`background in pulse power may be generated by distinctly
`
`22
`
`different circuitry as illustrated in Figure 7.
`
`23
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Okay.
`
` 19
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`
`MR. VU: So, you know, according to Wang, this is the
`
`circuitry that can generate the wave form of Figure 6.
`
`So, back to the wave form of Wang. Slide 29, we show,
`
`again, that the wave form of Wang has a duration and a rise time,
`
`and Wang acknowledges that Figure 6 is idealized and that the
`
`exact shape of the wave form, the rise times and fall times are
`
`expected to vary, depending on the choice of the DC power
`
`supply.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: So, let me ask you this, can you go
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`back to slide 29.
`
`11
`
`12
`
`MR. VU: Yes.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: I'm sorry about having to ask too
`
`13
`
`much questions here, but where is the rise time in that figure?
`
`14
`
`MR. VU: The rise time is not illustrated, and Wang is
`
`15
`
`clear that it's idealized, in the Specification he discusses that the
`
`16
`
`exact shape depends on the design of the pulse DC power supply
`
`17
`
`and significant rise times and fall times are expected.
`
`18
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Even if it's like idealized, like when
`
`19
`
`I'm driving a car, ideally I'm putting the gas in and try to stay at
`
`20
`
`55 miles per hour, but when you go up a hill, you might have to
`
`21
`
`adjust it. So, here, I understand it's idealized, but still, where is
`
`22
`
`the rise time?
`
`23
`
`MR. VU: The rise time would be specific -- in terms of
`
`24
`
`the wave form, Your Honor, it would be clearly between the flat
`
` 20
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`lower portion PB, the rise time would be the time that it takes to
`
`get to the top PP.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: So, it's almost like zero, then?
`
`MR. VU: In the idealized form, it would be zero.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Be zero, okay.
`
`MR. VU: In real life it's never zero.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Okay, thank you.
`
`MR. VU: And Wang recognizes that it can vary, it's
`
`going to significant rise times and fall times are expected
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`depending on the choice of the power supply.
`
`11
`
`12
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Okay.
`
`MR. VU: As to the rise time being chosen, Your
`
`13
`
`Honor, Wang discusses the time constants of the high-pass filter
`
`14
`
`or low-pass filter being chosen, and Zond's expert, we asked him
`
`15
`
`about it, he agrees the choice of the time constant for the
`
`16
`
`high-pass filter would enable fast rise times.
`
`17
`
`And then the final clause in this limitation is that -- is
`
`18
`
`that the amplitude, duration and rise time of the voltage pulse
`
`19
`
`increases at density of the ions in the strongly-ionized plasma,
`
`20
`
`and Your Honors are familiar with these disclosures of Wang, but
`
`21
`
`the very purpose of the high-powered pulse in Wang is to
`
`22
`
`increase the density of the ions in the plasma.
`
` 21
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`
`And again, we have the passage on slide 32 at the
`
`bottom, where he discusses the PP quickly causes the already
`
`existing plasma to spread and increase the density of the plasma.
`
`Slide 33, the Patent Owner does not raise any additional
`
`arguments as to these claims, so the same arguments that we
`
`discussed earlier relate to --
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Can we go back to the previous
`
`slide?
`
`MR. VU: Sure. Yes, Your Honor.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Sorry.
`
`MR. VU: Slide 32?
`
`JUDGE CHANG: Yes, um-hmm. Here, what Wang is
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`talking about is power, right? Level?
`
`14
`
`15
`
`MR. VU: Yes.
`
`JUDGE CHANG: So, here he's still talking about in the
`
`16
`
`claim itself it's a voltage pulse. So, how do we know that's being
`
`17
`
`strongly-ionized?
`
`18
`
`MR. VU: Yes, Your Honor, let me go back to the
`
`19
`
`impedance issue. Because this is a very important point in Wang.
`
`20
`
`We've already created in Wang a PB, the weakly-ionized plasma,
`
`21
`
`okay? And in both Wang and the '421 patent he discusses that
`
`22
`
`once this weakly-ionized plasma is created, we've got this
`
`23
`
`conductive environment that avoids arcing. Wang notes, okay,
`
`24
`
`that after PB, the chamber impedance changes relatively little
`
` 22
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781; IPR 2014-00782; IPR2014-01083;
`IPR2014-01086; IPR2014-01087 (Patent 7,147,759 B2)
`IPR2014-00800; IPR2014-00802; IPR2014-00805 (Patent 7,811,421 B2)
`
`between the two po
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
