`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`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
`CORPORAQTION, RENESAS ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`GLOBALFOUNDRIES U.S., INC., GLOBALFOUNDRIES DRESDEN
`MODULE ONE LLC & CO. KG, GLOBALFOUNDRIES DRESDEN
`MODULE TWO LLC & CO. KG, TOSHIBA AMERICA ELECTRONIC
`COMPONENTS, INC., TOSHIBA AMERICA INC., TOSHIBA
`AMERICA INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC., and
`THE GILLETTE COMPANY,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`ZOND, LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent 6,806,652 B1
`____________________________________________
`
`IPR Case Nos. IPR2014-00861, 01088, 010891
`____________________________________________
`
`SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF
`UWE KORTSHAGEN PH.D.
`ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER
`
`
`
`
`1 GlobalFoundries, U.S., Inc., GlobalFoundries Dresden Module One LLC & Co.
`KG, GlobalFoundries Dresden Module Two LLC & Co. KG, and The Gillette
`Company are the only Petitioners for IPR2014-01088 and IPR2014-01089.
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`V.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`BACKGROUND ............................................................................................. 2
`I.
`RELEVANT LAW .......................................................................................... 4
`II.
`SUMMARY OF OPINIONS: CLAIMS 1-35 ................................................. 4
`III.
`IV. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................ 5
`A.
`“super-ionizing the initial plasma” ........................................................ 5
`B.
`“super-ionizing the initial plasma proximate to the cathode assembly,
`thereby generating a high-density plasma” ........................................... 5
`C. Means-Plus-Function Claim Elements .................................................. 5
`RESPONSE TO PATENT OWNER’S ARGUMENTS REGARDING THE
`OBVIOUSNESS OF CLAIMS 1-35 ............................................................... 8
`A. General Discussion ................................................................................ 8
`1. Mozgrin Super-Ionizes the Initial Plasma ............................................. 8
`2. Fahey Generates an Initial Plasma and Excited Atoms From a Volume
`of Feed Gas in the Same Manner as Disclosed by the ’652 Patent .....27
`3. Applying Kudrayvtsev’s Teachings to Mozgrin and Fahey ...............31
`4. Iwamura Further Suggests the Combination of Mozgrin and
`Kudryavtsev with Fahey ......................................................................35
`Independent Claims 1, 18, and 35 .......................................................39
`1. Fahey Generates an Initial Plasma and Excited Atoms From a Volume
`of Feed Gas ..........................................................................................39
`2. Fahey with Mozgrin and Kudryavtsev Teach Transporting the Initial
`Plasma and Excited Atoms Proximate to a Cathode Assembly ..........43
`3. Mozgrin Super-Ionizes the Initial Plasma so as to Generate a High
`Density Plasma ....................................................................................45
`Dependent Claim 5: A RF Power Supply that Generates an
`Alternating Electric Field between the Cathode Assembly and the
`Anode ..................................................................................................47
`D. Dependent Claims 2-4, 6-17, and 19-34 Fall with Independent Claims
`1 and 18 ...............................................................................................50
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`I, Uwe Kortshagen, declare as follows:
`I.
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`
`
` My name is Uwe Kortshagen. 1.
`
`
`
` My background is detailed in my declarations submitted with the 2.
`
`original Petition for Inter Partes Review Case Nos. IPR2014-00861 (Ex. 1102),
`
`01088 (Ex. 1002), and 01089 (Ex. 1202).
`
`3.
`
`
`I have reviewed the following publications in preparing this
`
`declaration:
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 6,806,652 (the “’652 Patent”) (Exs. 1001, 1101, 1201).
`
`• 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” (Exs. 1003, 1103,
`
`1203)).
`
`• D. W. Fahey, et al., High flux beam source of thermal rare-gas metastable
`
`atoms, J. Phys. E; Sci. Insrum., Vol. 13, 1980 (“Fahey” (Exs. 1005, 1105,
`
`1205)).
`
`• A. A. Kudryavtsev, et al., Ionization relaxation in a plasma produced by a
`
`pulsed inert-gas discharge, Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys. 28(1), pp. 30-35, January
`
`1983 (“Kudryavtsev” (Exs. 1006, 1106, 1206)).
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 5,753,886 (“Iwamura” (Exs. 1007, 1108, 1208)).
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`• U.S. Patent No. 3,461,054 (“Vratny” (Ex. 1008)).
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 6,190,512 (“Lantsman” (Ex. 1012)).
`
`• U.S. Patent No. 5,429,070 (“Campbell” (Ex. 1114)).
`
`4.
`
`
`Also, I have reviewed papers in the Inter Partes Review Case Nos.
`
`IPR2014-00861, 01088, and 01089, including the Petitions and my accompanying
`
`Declarations. Further, I have reviewed the Board’s Institution Decisions (“ID”),
`
`Patent Owner’s Responses, the accompanying Declaration of Larry D. Hartsough,
`
`Ph.D in support of Patent Owner’s Responses (“Hartsough Dec.” (Ex. 2002)), and
`
`the deposition testimony of Dr. Hartsough given on May 14, 2015 in connection
`
`with Case Nos. IPR2014-00861 (Ex. 1120), 01088 (Ex. 1021), and 01089 (Ex.
`
`1217) (“Hartsough Dep.”).
`
`5.
`
`
`I have read and understood each of the above publications and any
`
`other publication cited in this declaration. As I stated previously, 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.
`
`6.
`
`
`I have considered certain issues from the perspective of a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time the ’652 Patent application was filed. In my
`
`opinion, a person of ordinary skill in the art for the ’652 Patent would have found
`
`the ’652 Patent invalid.
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`7.
`
`
`I have been retained by Petitioner as an expert in the field of plasma
`
`technology. I am working as an independent consultant in this matter on behalf of
`
`Petitioner and am being compensated at my normal consulting rate of $450/hour
`
`for my time. My compensation is not dependent on and in no way affects the
`
`substance of my statements in this declaration.
`
`8.
`
`
`I have no financial interest in the Petitioners. I similarly have no
`
`financial interest in the ’652 Patent, and have had no contact with the named
`
`inventor of the ’652 Patent.
`
`II. RELEVANT LAW
`I am not an attorney. For the purposes of this declaration, I have been
`9.
`
`
`informed about certain aspects of the law that are relevant to my opinions. My
`
`understanding of the law is detailed in my declaration submitted with the original
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review Case Nos. IPR2014-00861, 01088, and 01089,
`
`and my understanding remains the same for my instant declaration.
`
`III. SUMMARY OF OPINIONS: CLAIMS 1-35
`I am unpersuaded by the arguments contained in Patent Owner’s
`10.
`
`
`Responses and Dr. Hartsough’s declaration, as will be explained in greater detail
`
`below. I therefore maintain my findings as expressed at (1) Case No. 2014-00861,
`
`Ex. 1102, ¶¶ 126-170 captioned Grounds III-VII; (2) Case No. 2014-01088, Ex.
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`1002, ¶¶ 141-150 captioned Grounds V-VIII; and (3) Case No. 2014-01089, Ex.
`
`1202, ¶¶ 98-106, and 125-130 captioned Ground II, and Ground IV.
`
`
`
` Thus, it remains my opinion that every limitation of the plasma 11.
`
`generation apparatuses and methods described in claims 1 through 35 of the ’652
`
`Patent are disclosed by the prior art, and are rendered obvious by the prior art.
`
`IV. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`“super-ionizing the initial plasma”
`A.
` The Petitioner had previously proposed, and the Board adopted, the 12.
`
`
`
`construction that the claim term “super-ionizing the initial plasma” means
`
`“converting at least 75% of the neutral atoms in the initial plasma into ions.”
`
`IPR2014-01088, Decision at pp. 10-11 (Paper No. 16).
`
`B.
`
` “super-ionizing the initial plasma proximate to the cathode
`assembly, thereby generating a high-density plasma”
`
`
`
` The Petitioner had previously proposed, and the Board adopted, the 13.
`
`construction that the claim term “super-ionizing the initial plasma proximate to the
`
`cathode assembly, thereby generating a high-density plasma” means “converting at
`
`least 75% of the neutral atoms in the initial plasma into ions near the cathode
`
`assembly.” IPR2014-00861, Decision at pp. 11-12 (Paper No. 12).
`
`C. Means-Plus-Function Claim Elements
` The Petitioner had previously proposed three claim elements recited 14.
`
`
`in claim 35 of the ’652 Patent as means-plus-function elements. The Board
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`adopted the Petitioner’s proposal that the corresponding structures for the means-
`
`plus-function elements identified by Petitioner are as follows:
`
`Recited functions in italics
`
`Corresponding structures
`
`means for generating an initial
`plasma and excited atoms from
`a volume of feed gas
`
`means for transporting the
`initial plasma and excited
`atoms proximate to a cathode
`assembly
`
`excited atom source—e.g., excited atom source
`732b (cathode assembly) that has tube 733,
`which is surrounded by enclosure 735 that
`defines electrode chamber 739, in which is
`positioned electrode 741 connected to first power
`supply 731 as shown in Figure 12 of the ’652
`patent. See Ex. 1201, 25:30-26:15, Fig. 12.
`
`gap—e.g. gap 212 or region 214 defined by an
`outer cathode section and an anode spaced apart
`from the cathode sufficient to allow current to
`flow through region 214, and first power supply
`206, which is separate from a second power
`supply used to super-ionize the plasma as shown
`in Figure 2 of the ’652 patent. See Ex. 1201,
`6:34-7:9, FIG. 2.
`
`gas exchange system—e.g., gas exchange
`system 238, 242 that flows gas through the outer
`cathode sections 202b/656b/702b/722b/732b
`through gap 214, toward inner cathode assembly
`202a/732a as shown in Figures 2, 3, 5, 6, and 12
`of the ’652 patent. Ex. 1201, 8:1-5, 8:36-52,
`FIGS. 2, 3, 6, 7, and 12.
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`means for super-ionizing the
`initial plasma proximate to the
`cathode assembly
`
`a second power supply that generates an electric
`field across inner cathode 202a or inner cathode
`732 , and inner anode 226 or 658 or inner anode
`703, as shown in Figures 2A, 2B, 3, 5, 6, and 12
`of the ’652 patent. Ex. 1201, 7:20-29, 16:33-41,
`18:10-21, 20:48-56, 22:9-16, 27:23-37, FIGS.
`2A, 2B, 3, 5, 6, and 12.
`
`
`See IPR2014-01089, Decision at pp. 11-18 (Paper No. 13).
`
`
`
` Patent Owner disagrees with the Board’s construction of the means-15.
`
`plus-function elements of claim 35, and specifically identifies the Board’s
`
`construction of “volume of feed gas.” See IPR2014-01089, Patent Owner’s
`
`Response at p. 10, FN. 20 (Paper No. 23). Patent Owner advances the same basic
`
`argument that was previously rejected by the Board – the claim limitation
`
`“generating an initial plasma and excited atoms from a volume of feed gas” should
`
`be narrowly construed to require generating both an initial plasma and excited
`
`atoms from the same volume of feed gas. See Id.; see also IPR2014-01089, ID at
`
`p. 31 (Paper No. 13). Despite Patent Owner’s disagreement with the Board’s
`
`construction, both Patent Owner’s Responses and the accompanying declaration of
`
`Patent Owner’s expert, Dr. Hartsough, apply the Board’s claim constructions,
`
`including the means-plus-function elements of claim 35. See IPR2014-01089,
`
`Patent Owner’s Response at p. 10, FN. 20 (Paper No. 23).
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`
`
` Notably, Dr. Hartsough did not raise any disagreement with the 16.
`
`Board’s constructions. See Hartsough Dec. ¶ 19. Accordingly, it appears that only
`
`Patent Owner’s counsel disagrees with the Board’s construction. I believe the
`
`Board’s constructions to be correct and is not disputed by any parties’ expert in
`
`this case. My opinion that the claims of the ’652 Patent are rendered obvious by
`
`the prior art applies the Board’s constructions.
`
`V. RESPONSE TO PATENT OWNER’S ARGUMENTS REGARDING
`THE OBVIOUSNESS OF CLAIMS 1-35
`A. General Discussion
`1. Mozgrin Super-Ionizes the Initial Plasma
`
`
` Neither Patent Owner nor Dr. Hartsough dispute that Mozgrin teaches 17.
`
`super-ionizing an initial plasma to generate a high-density plasma. See Kortshagen
`
`Dec. at ¶¶ 71, 80 (Ex. 1002); Kortshagen Dec. at ¶¶ 76, 85 (Ex. 1102); Kortshagen
`
`Dec. at ¶¶ 87, 96 (Ex. 1202). Instead, Patent Owner and Dr. Hartsough merely
`
`attack the calculation that I used to illustrate Mozgrin’s super-ionization under one
`
`set of disclosed parameters. See IPR2014-00861, Patent Owner’s Response at pp.
`
`1-3 (Paper No. 33); IPR2014-01088, Patent Owner’s Response at pp. 1-3 (Paper
`
`No. 28); IPR2014-01089, Patent Owner’s Response at pp. 1-3 (Paper No. 23).
`
`
`
` Both Patent Owner’s and Dr. Hartsough’s assertions fail for a number 18.
`
`of distinct reasons. First, Mozgrin discloses parameters that super-ionize the
`
`initial plasma to generate a high-density plasma in the same manner as taught by
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`the ’652 Patent. Second, Mozgrin expressly confirms that the initial plasma is
`
`super-ionized. Third, contrary to Patent Owner and Dr. Hartsough’s assertions, the
`
`calculation used to illustrate that Mozgrin super-ionizes the initial plasma
`
`demonstrates the percentage of ions that are generated from the initial plasma.
`
`Fourth, contrary to Patent Owner and Dr. Hartsough’s assertions, Mozgrin
`
`controlled the pressure in his plasma chamber. Finally, even assuming Mozgrin’s
`
`plasma chamber is a closed system as Patent Owner and Dr. Hartsough incorrectly
`
`assert, the resulting increase in pressure due to generating the high-density plasma
`
`will not materially affect the conclusion that Mozgrin super-ionizes the initial
`
`plasma.
`
`a) Mozgrin discloses parameters that super-ionize the initial
`plasma in the same manner as taught by the ’652 Patent
`
`
`
` As stated in my initial declarations, Mozgrin discloses parameters that 19.
`
`super-ionize the initial plasma. See Kortshagen Dec. at ¶ 71 (Ex. 1002);
`
`Kortshagen Dec. at ¶ 76 (Ex. 1102); Kortshagen Dec, at ¶ 87 (Ex. 1202). The ’652
`
`Patent consistently discloses that super-ionization of an initial plasma is achieved
`
`by applying a high-power pulse to the initial plasma. See ’652 Patent at 11:54-58
`
`(“The second power supply 222 generates high power pulses that launch additional
`
`power into the already strongly ionized plasma, and, therefore, super-ionize the
`
`high-density plasma in the region 252.”); 16:33-38 (“The second power supply 222
`
`generates a strong electric field between the second anode 226 and the inner
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`cathode section 202a. The strong electric field super-ionizes the initial plasma to
`
`generate a high-density plasma having an ion density that is greater than the ion
`
`density of the initial plasma”); 18:10-15 (‘At time t2, the second power supply 222
`
`delivers a high-power pulse 404 to the initial plasma … The high-power pulse 404
`
`substantially super-ionizes the initial plasma to generate a high-density plasma.”).
`
`
`
` Figure 4 of the ’652 Patent discloses a graphical illustration of the 20.
`
`high-power pulse applied to the initial plasma to super-ionize the initial plasma.
`
`’652 Patent at 17:53-56. An annotated excerpt of Figure 4 is shown below:
`
`
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

` As shown in Figure 4, above, “[a]t time t1 the first power supply 206
`21.
`
`generates a power 402 that is in the range of about 0.01kW to 100kW … [t]he
`
`power 402 causes the feed gas 234 to become at least partially ionized, thereby
`
`generating an initial plasma that can be a pre-ionization plasma as previously
`
`discussed.” ’652 Patent at 17:66-18:5. The ’652 Patent discloses the “pre-
`
`ionization plasma can be a weakly ionized plasma,” and further discloses that the
`
`weakly-ionized plasma may have a plasma density of about 107 cm-3 to 1012 cm-3.
`
`’652 Patent at 8:54-62.
`
`
`
` After the weakly-ionized pre-ionization plasma is generated, “[a]t 22.
`
`time t2, the second power supply 222 delivers a high-power pulse 404 to the initial
`
`plasma that is in the range of about 1kW to 10MW … [t]he high-power pulse 404
`
`substantially super-ionizes the initial plasma to generate a high-density plasma.”
`
`’652 Patent at 18:10-15. The high-density or “strongly-ionized” plasma that is
`
`formed by super-ionizing the weakly-ionized plasma may have a plasma density
`
`greater than 1012 cm-3. ’652 Patent at 10:57-63.
`
`
`
` Other than the power applied by the first and second power supplies, 23.
`
`and the relative plasma densities of the weakly-ionized pre-ionization plasma and
`
`the high-density plasma, the ’652 Patent discloses only two other parameters to
`
`super-ionize the pre-ionization plasma as shown in Figure 4: “[t]he high-power
`
`pulse 404 has a leading edge 406 having a rise time from t2 to t3 that is
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`approximately in the range of 0.1 microseconds to ten seconds” and “the pulse
`
`width of the high-power pulse 404 is in the range of about one microsecond to ten
`
`seconds.” ’652 Patent at 18:15-24.
`
`
`
` Similar to the ’652 Patent, Mozgrin teaches generating a high-density 24.
`
`plasma from an initial plasma. Like the ’652 Patent, Mozgrin discloses generating
`
`a pre-ionization plasma (an initial plasma) with power applied from a pre-
`
`ionization system comprising a stationary discharge supply unit. See Mozgrin at p.
`
`401, left col. ¶¶ 4-5. Mozgrin further discloses that after the initial plasma is
`
`generated by the stationary discharge supply unit, a high-power pulse is applied to
`
`the initial plasma from a pulsed discharge supply unit, increasing the plasma
`
`density of the initial plasma. See Mozgrin at p. 402, right col. ¶ 2.
`
`
`
` Figure 2 of Mozgrin illustrates Mozgrin’s discharge supply system 25.
`
`comprising the stationary discharge supply unit which generates the initial plasma,
`
`and the pulsed discharge supply unit that increases the plasma density of the initial
`
`plasma. Mozgrin at p. 401, left col. ¶ 5. Figure 3 of Mozgrin illustrates the
`
`voltage and current oscillogram of the quasi-stationary discharge applied by the
`
`discharge supply system. Mozgrin at p. 402, right col. ¶ 2. Annotated Figures 2
`
`and 3 are illustrated below:
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`
`
` Mozgrin explains that the discharge that generates the initial plasma
`26.
`
`has a current up to 0.2A and a voltage range from 260-280V. Mozgrin at p. 402,
`
`right col. ¶ 3. Applying Ohm’s Law (Power (P) = Current (I) x Voltage (V)), the
`
`stationary discharge supply unit applies a power between 52W and 56W to
`
`generate the initial plasma. The initial plasma density ni ranged from 107–109 cm-3.
`
`Mozgrin at p. 401, left col. ¶ 4. Notably, Mozgrin’s initial plasma density
`
`(between 107–109 cm-3) is within the range of the initial plasma density disclosed
`
`by the ’652 Patent (between 107 cm-3 to 1012 cm-3). Compare ’652 Patent at 8:54-
`
`62, with Mozgrin at p. 401, left col. ¶ 4.
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`
`
` Following the generation of the initial plasma, the high-voltage supply 27.
`
`unit applies a discharge that increases the plasma density. See Mozgrin at p. 402,
`
`right col. ¶ 2. Mozgrin explains that in “a diffuse regime of high current discharge
`
`… [t]he discharge voltage was about 90V over the current range” and the current
`
`ranged from 15 to 1400A. See Mozgrin at p. 403, left col. ¶ 1; p. 404, right col. ¶
`
`2. Again, applying Ohm’s law, the high-voltage supply unit applies a power
`
`between 1.35kW and 126kW to the initial plasma. Mozgrin further explains that
`
`“[t]he maximal density of high-current diffuse discharge in argon was measured to
`
`be ni = 1.5 x 1015 cm-3” at a discharge current of 1100A which corresponds to a
`
`power of approximately 100kW (90V x 1100A). Mozgrin at p. 404, right col. ¶ 2.
`
`The plasma density of Mozgrin’s high-current diffuse discharge of 1.5 x 1015 cm-3
`
`is well above the “greater than 1012 cm-3” range defined by the ’652 Patent as being
`
`a “strongly-ionized plasma.” See ’652 Patent at 10:57-63.
`
`
`
` Finally, Mozgrin discloses that the high-voltage supply unit that 28.
`
`generates the high-current diffuse discharge from the initial plasma has a rise time
`
`of 5 - 60µs and pulse durations of up to 1.5ms. See Mozgrin at p. 401, right col. ¶
`
`1. In the case where the initial plasma comprises argon having a plasma density of
`
`109 – 1011 cm-3, Mozgrin specifically discloses the pulse duration is about 50µs.
`
`See Mozgrin at Fig. 3; p. 401, right col. ¶ 1. Again, Mozgrin’s discloses the rise
`
`time and pulse duration of the high-power pulse that is applied to the initial plasma
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`to generate the high-current diffuse discharge is within the 0.1µs – 10s range for
`
`rise time and pulse duration of the high-power pulse disclosed by the ’652 Patent
`
`that “substantially super-ionizes the initial plasma.” See ’652 Patent at 18:13-24.
`
`
`
` A comparison of the parameters disclosed by the ’652 Patent used to 29.
`
`super-ionize the initial plasma to generate a high-density plasma and the
`
`parameters disclosed by Mozgrin to generate a high-density plasma from the initial
`
`plasma is summarized in the table below.
`
`
`Generating
`the initial
`plasma
`
`Generating
`the high-
`density
`plasma
`
`’652 Patent
`Applied Power: 10W to 100kW.
`’652 Patent at 17:67-18:1.
`
`Resulting Plasma Density: 107
`to 1012 cm-3. ’652 Patent at
`8:60-62.
`High-Power Pulse: 1kW to
`1MW. ’652 Patent at 18:10-12.
`
`Pulse Rise Time: 0.1µs to 10s.
`’652 Patent at 18:16-18.
`
`Pulse Duration: 0.1µs to 10s.
`’652 Patent at 18:22-24.
`
`Resulting Plasma Density:
`Greater than 1012 cm-3. ’652
`Patent at 10:57-63.
`
`Mozgrin
`Applied Power: 52W to 56W.
`Mozgrin at p. 402, right col. ¶ 3.
`
`Resulting Plasma Density: 109 –
`1011 cm-3. Mozgrin at p. 402,
`right col. ¶ 2.
`High-Power Pulse: 100kW.
`Mozgrin at p. 404, right col. ¶ 2.
`
`Pulse Rise Time: 5µs to 60µs.
`Mozgrin at p. 401, right col. ¶ 1.
`
`Pulse Duration: 50µs. Mozgrin
`at Fig. 3; p. 401, right col. ¶ 1.
`
`Resulting Plasma Density: 1.5 x
`1015 cm-3. Mozgrin at p. 404,
`right col. ¶ 2.
`
`
`
` As shown above, Mozgrin expressly teaches generating a high-density 30.
`
`plasma from an initial plasma under the conditions and parameters that the ’652
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`Patent discloses will super-ionize the initial plasma to generate a high-density
`
`plasma.
`
`b) Mozgrin expressly confirms the initial plasma is super-
`ionized to generate a high-density plasma.
`
`31.
`
`
` Not only does Mozgrin disclose parameters that super-ionize the
`
`initial plasma in the same manner as taught by the ’652 Patent, Mozgrin expressly
`
`confirms the initial plasma is super-ionized to form the high-density plasma.
`
`Specifically, Mozgrin explains that “for the discharge transit from regime 2 to
`
`regime 3 … the ionization degree α = ne / (ng + ni) ranges from α ≈ 1 (p = 0.01
`
`torr) to α ≈ 0.7 (p = 1torr).” See Mozgrin at p. 407, left col. ¶ 2; right col. ¶ 3
`
`(emphasis added).
`
`
`
` As previously discussed, Mozgrin discloses generating a high-current 32.
`
`diffuse discharge (regime 3) having a plasma density of, for example, 1.5 x 1015
`
`cm-3 from the initial plasma. See Mozgrin at p. 404, right col. ¶ 2. As such, the
`
`variable ne represents the density of electrons in the high-density plasma formed in
`
`Mozgrin’s regime 3. Likewise, the variable ng represents the density of neutral gas
`
`atoms, and the variable ni represents the density of ions. Thus, a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize that when the ionization degree α
`
`≈ 1, this indicates that about 100% of the neutral gas atoms in the initial plasma are
`
`ionized when the high-density plasma is generated from the initial plasma.
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`
`
` As stated in my initial declarations, the density of the plasma refers to 33.
`
`the number of ions or electrons that are present in a unit volume. Kortshagen Dec.
`
`at ¶ 25 (Ex. 1002); Kortshagen Dec. at ¶ 26 (Ex. 1102); Kortshagen Dec. at ¶ 26
`
`(Ex. 1202). In a plasma, the density of electrons (ne) is essentially equal to the
`
`density of ions (ni). Because one gas atom is required to generate one ion, as the
`
`density of ions (ni) increases, the corresponding density of gas atoms (ng)
`
`decreases. Thus, the denominator (ng + ni) will remain constant, even as the
`
`density of ions (ni) increases. As the density of neutral gas atoms (ng) approaches
`
`zero, the ionization degree (α) will approach 1, or in other words, 100% of the
`
`neutral gas atoms will be ionized.
`
` Dr. Hartsough confirms this to be his understanding as well. See
`34.
`
`Hartsough Dep. at p. 124:12-23 (“Q: Do you have an understanding of what it
`
`means when [α] roughly equals one, as it’s indicated? A: Well, my understanding
`
`is it would be almost completely ionized. Q: So 100 percent ionization? A:
`
`That’s what it says.”) (emphasis added). Accordingly, Mozgrin expressly
`
`confirms that under certain conditions, for example when pressure = 0.01 torr, the
`
`initial plasma is super-ionized to generate the high-density plasma in Mozgrin’s
`
`regime 3 because the ionization degree α ≈ 1, indicating nearly 100% of the neutral
`
`gas atoms in the initial plasma are ionized.
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`c)
`
`The calculation used to illustrate Mozgrin super-ionizes
`the initial plasma demonstrates the percentage of ions
`that are generated from the initial plasma
`
`
`
` Neither Patent Owner nor Dr. Hartsough dispute the fact that Mozgrin 35.
`
`teaches super-ionizing an initial plasma to generate a high-density plasma. Instead,
`
`Patent Owner and Dr. Hartsough attack the calculation used to illustrate Mozgrin’s
`
`super-ionization under one set of disclosed parameters. See, e.g. IPR2014-00861,
`
`Patent Owner’s Response at pp. 1-3 (Paper No. 33); IPR2014-01088, Patent
`
`Owner’s Response at pp. 1-3 (Paper No. 28); IPR2014-01089, Patent Owner’s
`
`Response at pp. 1-3 (Paper No. 23).
`
`
`
` Specifically, Patent Owner and Dr. Hartsough argue that the 36.
`
`calculation only shows a degree of ionization of the final high-density plasma of
`
`75%, and this does not show that 75% of the atoms in the initial plasma are ionized
`
`as the calculation neglects the ionization of the initial plasma. See IPR2014-
`
`00861, Patent Owner’s Response at p. 3 (Paper No. 33); see also IPR2014-01088,
`
`Patent Owner’s Response at p. 2 (Paper No. 28); IPR2014-01089, Patent Owner’s
`
`Response at pp. 2-3 (Paper No. 23).
`
`
`
` Mozgrin discloses, and Patent Owner does not dispute, that the final 37.
`
`high-density plasma is created in the same volume as the initial plasma. See
`
`Mozgrin at Abstract; see also IPR2014-00816, Patent Owner’s Response at p. 16
`
`(“Thus, the high-voltage component increases the ionization of the pre-ionized
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`plasma, while the plasma remains in the same location where the stationary unit
`
`created it.”) (emphasis in original) (Paper No. 33); IPR2014-01088, Patent
`
`Owner’s Response at p. 16 (Paper No. 28) (same); IPR2014-01089, Patent
`
`Owner’s Response at pp. 13-14 (Paper No. 23) (same). Mozgrin further discloses
`
`that the high-density plasma generated in regime 3 generated from the initial
`
`plasma has a plasma density that is substantially greater than the initial plasma.
`
`Compare Mozgrin at p. 404, right col. ¶ 2 (“The maximal plasma density of high-
`
`current diffuse discharge in argon was measured to be ni = 1.5 x 1015 cm-3”) with
`
`Mozgrin at p. 401, left col. ¶ 3 (“The necessary pre-ionized plasma density ni
`
`turned out to be 107 – 109 cm-3 for argon.”).
`
`
`
` Taking into consideration the upper bound of the initial plasma 38.
`
`density of 109 cm-3, an additional 1.499999 x 1015 cm-3 of neutral gas atoms in the
`
`initial plasma must be ionized to generate the high-density plasma in Mozgrin’s
`
`regime 3 having a plasma density of 1.5 x 1015 cm-3 (1.499999 x 1015 cm-3 + 109
`
`
`
`cm-3 = 1.5 x 1015 cm-3). Thus, as I stated in my initial declarations, a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would have understood that if Mozgrin’s neutral gas
`
`density were about 2.0 x 1015 atoms cm-3 – or more precisely 1.9999986 x 1015
`
`atoms cm-3 – or less, then at least 75% of the neutral gas atoms present in the
`
`initial plasma would have been ionized (1.9999986 x 1015 atoms cm-3 x 75% =
`
`1.499999 x 1015 ions cm-3) to generate the final high-density plasma having a
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`plasma density of 1.5 x 1015 cm-3. Kortshagen Dec. at ¶ 72 (Ex. 1002); Kortshagen
`
`Dec. at ¶ 77 (Ex. 1102); Kortshagen Dec. at ¶ 88 (Ex. 1202).
`
`
`
` Stated differently, the difference between the precise number of 39.
`
`neutral gas atoms in the initial plasma required to super-ionize the initial plasma
`
`and the number used in my previous calculations is so minute (2.0 x 1015
`
`atoms/cm-3 versus 1.9999986 x 1015 atoms/cm-3) that it is negligible and
`
`immaterial to the ultimate conclusion reached – that Mozgrin converts at least
`
`75% of the neutral gas atoms in the initial plasma to generate the final high-density
`
`plasma. See Kortshagen Dec. at ¶ 78 (Ex. 1002); Kortshagen Dec. at ¶ 83 (Ex.
`
`1102); Kortshagen Dec. at ¶ 94 (Ex. 1202).
`
`
`
` Accordingly, contrary to Patent Owner and Dr. Hartsough’s 40.
`
`assertions, the calculation used to illustrate Mozgrin super-ionizes the initial
`
`plasma in my initial declarations demonstrate the percentage of ions that were
`
`generated from the neutral gas atoms in the initial plasma. See Kortshagen Dec. at
`
`¶¶ 72-78 (Ex. 1002); Kortshagen Dec. at ¶¶ 77-83 (Ex. 1102); Kortshagen Dec. at
`
`¶¶ 88-94 (Ex. 1202). This is entirely consistent with Mozgrin’s express
`
`confirmation that the high-density plasma generated in Mozgrin’s regime 3
`
`approaches 100% ionization under certain conditions as explained previously in
`
`Section V(A)(1)(b), above.
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`d) Mozgrin controlled the pressure in his plasma chamber
`
`
` Patent Owner further attempts to discredit the calculation used to 41.
`
`illustrate that Mozgrin super-ionizes the initial plasma to generate the high-density
`
`plasma in regime 3 by inexplicably arguing that “Mozgrin does not control
`
`pressure of his fill gas, so as temperature rises, pressure will rise.” See IPR2014-
`
`00861, Patent Owner’s Response at pp. 2-3 (Paper No. 33); IPR2041-01088, Patent
`
`Owner’s Response at pp.2-3 (Paper No. 28).
`
`
`
` Notably, Patent Owner’s assertion was not supported by Dr. 42.
`
`Hartsough’s declaration, and Patent Owner provided no explanation as to how
`
`Patent Owner reached the conclusion that Mozgrin does not control pressure in his
`
`plasma chamber, especially given the fact that (1) Mozgrin discloses the pressure
`
`of the gas in his chamber throughout his paper in connection with his experiments;
`
`and (2) nowhere in his paper does Mozgrin state that the experiments were
`
`conducted in a closed system as Patent Owner contends. See e.g. Mozgrin at p.
`
`406, Table 1 (column labeled “Pressure, torr”); p. 407, Table 2 (column labeled
`
`“Pressure, torr”). Moreover, Patent Owner did not raise this argument in its
`
`IPR2014-01089, Patent Owner Response (Paper No. 23).
`
`
`
` While Dr. Hartsough did not offer any opinion in his declaration 43.
`
`regarding the pressure in Mozgrin’s plasma chamber during his deposition, Dr.
`
`Hartsough stated that he referred to the experimental setup described in Mozgrin’s
`
`GlobalFoundries 1216
`IPR2014-01089
`
`

`

`Thesis as disclosing a closed plasma chamber, i.e. the chamber was filled up with a
`
`gas until it reached a certain pressure, and then the feed gas supply is turned off.
`
`See Hartsough Dep. at p. 99:23 – 100:7. Dr. Hartsough did not refer to, or rely
`
`upon, the Mozgrin Thesis in his declaration, nor did he provide any explanation as
`
`to how the Mozgrin Thesis describes the syst