U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`Docket No. 1642930-0008 IPRl
`
`Filed on behalf of GLOBALFOUNDRIES U.S., Inc., GLOBALFOUNDRIES
`Dresden Module One LLC & CO. KG, GLOBALFOUNDRIES Dresden Module
`Two LLC & CO. KG
`
`By: David M. Tennant, Reg. No. 48,362
`White & Case LLP
`
`701 Thirteenth Street, NW
`
`Washington, DC 20005
`Tel: (202) 626-3684
`Email: dtennant@whitecase.com
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`GLOBALFOUNDRIES U.S., INC., GLOBALFOUNDRIES DRESDEN
`
`MODULE ONE LLC & CO. KG, GLOBALFOUNDRIES DRESDEN MODULE
`TWO LLC & CO. KG
`
`Petitioner
`
`V.
`
`ZOND, INC.
`Patent Owner
`
`IPR Case No.
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF
`
`US. PATENT NO. 6,806,652
`
`CHALLENGING CLAIM 35
`
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 312 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.104
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`MANDATORY NOTICES .............................................................................. 1
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Real Party-in—Interest............................................................................. 1
`
`Related Matters ...................................................................................... 1
`
`Counsel .................................................................................................. 1
`
`Service Information ............................................................................... 1
`
`CERTIFICATION OF GROUNDS FOR STANDING .................................. 2
`
`OVERVIEW OF CHALLENGE AND RELIEF REQUESTED .................... 2
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Prior Art Patents and Printed Publications ............................................ 2
`
`Grounds for Challenge .......................................................................... 3
`
`Legal Principles ..................................................................................... 4
`
`II.
`
`III.
`
`IV.
`
`BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF TECHNOLOGY ................................................ 5
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Plasma .................................................................................................... 6
`
`Excited atoms ........................................................................................ 7
`
`OVERVIEW OF THE ’652 PATENT ............................................................ 8
`
`A.
`
`Summary of Alleged Invention of the ’652 Patent ............................... 8
`
`VI.
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 12
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Introduction ........................................................................................ 1 2
`
`“means for generating an initial plasma and excited atoms from a
`volume of feed gas” ............................................................................ 13
`
`“means for transporting the initial plasma and excited atoms
`proximate to a cathode assembly” ...................................................... 15
`
`“means for super—ionizing the initial plasma proximate to the cathode
`assembly” ............................................................................................ 1 6
`
`VII.
`
`OVERVIEW OF THE PRIMARY PRIOR ART REFERENCES ............... 17
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`Summary of the prior art .................................................................... 17
`
`Overview of Mozgrin ......................................................................... 17
`
`Overview of Kudryavtsev ................................................................... 20
`
`Overview of Fahey ............................................................................. 22
`
`Overview of Iwamura ......................................................................... 22
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Parl‘es Review
`
`VIII. SPECIFIC GROUNDS FOR PETITION ................................................ 23
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Ground I: Claim 35 would have been obvious over Mozgrin,
`Kudryavtsev, and Fahey ..................................................................... 24
`
`Ground II: Claim 35 would have been obvious over Mozgrin,
`Kudryavtsev, Fahey, and Iwamura ..................................................... 38
`
`Ground III: Claim 35 would have been obvious over Mozgrin and
`Iwamura .............................................................................................. 42
`
`Ground IV: Claim 35 would have been obvious over Mozgrin,
`Iwamura, and F ahey ........................................................................... 50
`
`IX.
`
`CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 53
`
`ii
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Cases
`
`In KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. ,
`550 U.S. 398, 415 (2007) ............................ 4, 5, 29, 32, 38, 42, 47, 49, 50, 52
`
`In re ICON Health & Fitness, Inc.,
`496 F.3d 1374, 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2007) .......................................................... 12
`
`Rockwell Int ’l Corp. v. United States,
`147 F.3d 1358, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 1998) ............................................................ 4
`
`Statutes
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 ..................................................................................................... 3, 4
`
`35 U.S.C. § 314(a) ..................................................................................................... 3
`
`Rules
`
`Rule 42.104(a) ........................................................................................................... 2
`
`Rules 42.22(a)(1) and 42.104(b)(1)—(2) .................................................................... 2
`
`Regulations
`
`37 CPR. § 42.100(b) .............................................................................................. 12
`
`77 Fed. Reg. 48764 (Aug. 14, 2012) ....................................................................... 12
`
`iii
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`I.
`
`MANDATORY NOTICES
`
`A.
`
`Real Party—in-Interest
`
`GLOBALFOUNDRIES U.S., Inc., GLOBALFOUNDRIES Dresden Module
`
`One LLC & Co. KG, GLOBALFOUNDRIES Dresden Module Two LLC & Co.
`
`KG (collectively, “Petitioner”) are the real parties—in—interest.
`
`B.
`
`Related Matters
`
`Zond has asserted U.S. Patent No. 6,806,652 (“the ’652 Patent”) (Ex. 1201)
`
`against numerous parties in the District of Massachusetts. See List of Related
`
`Litigations (Ex. 1214). Petitioner is also filing additional Petitions for Inter Partes
`
`review in several patents that name the same alleged inventor. The below-listed
`
`claims of the ’652 Patent are presently the subject of two substantially identical
`
`petitions for inter partes review with Case Nos. IPR2014-00923 and IPR2014-
`
`01004. Petitioner plans to seek joinder with IPR2014-00923.
`
`C.
`
`Counsel
`
`Lead Counsel: David M. Tennant (Reg. No. 48,362)
`
`Backup Counsel: Dohm Chankong (Reg. No. 70,524)
`
`D.
`
`Service Information
`
`Pursuant to 37 CPR. § 42.8(b)(4), papers concerning this matter should be
`
`served on the following. Petitioner consents to electronic service.
`
`David M. Tennant (Reg. No. 48,362)
`
`E-mail:
`
`dtennant@whitecase.com
`
`1
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`Post and hand delivery: White & Case LLP
`
`701 Thirteenth Street, NW
`
`Washington, DC 20005
`
`Telephone: (202) 626-3684
`
`Fax: (202) 639-9355
`
`II.
`
`CERTIFICATION OF GROUNDS FOR STANDING
`
`Petitioner certifies pursuant to Rule 42.104(a) that the patent for which
`
`review is sought is available for inter partes review and that Petitioner is not
`
`barred or estopped from requesting an inter partes review challenging the patent
`
`claims on the grounds identified in this Petition.
`
`III. OVERVIEW OF CHALLENGE AND RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Pursuant to Rules 42.22(a)(1) and 42.104(b)(l)-(2), Petitioner challenges
`
`Claim 35 (“Challenged Claim”) of the ’652 Patent.
`
`A.
`
`Prior Art Patents and Printed Publications
`
`Petitioner relies upon the following prior art patents and printed publications
`
`and others in the Table of Exhibits:1
`
`1.
`
`D.V. Mozgrin, et al, High-Current Low-Pressure Quasi—Stationary
`
`Discharge in a Magnetic Field: Experimental Research, Plasma Physics Reports,
`
`1 The ’652 Patent was issued prior to the America Invents Act (the “AIA”).
`
`Therefore, Petitioner has chosen to use the pre-AIA statutory framework to refer to
`
`the prior art.
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Parl‘es Review
`
`Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 400-409, 1995 (“Mozgrin” (EX. 1203)), which is prior art under
`
`§ 102(b).
`
`2.
`
`Wang, US. Pat. No. 6,413,382 (“Wang” (Ex. 1204)), which is prior art at
`
`least under §§ 102(a) and (e).
`
`3.
`
`D. W. Fahey, et al., High flux beam source of thermal rare—gas metastable
`
`
`atoms, J. Phys. E; Sci. Insrum., Vol. 13, 1980 (“Fahey” (Ex. 1205)), which is prior
`
`art under § 102(b).
`
`4.
`
`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. 1206)), which is prior art under § 102(b).
`
`5.
`
`Iwamura, US. Patent No. 5,753,886 (“Iwamura” (Ex. 1208)), which is prior
`
`art at least under § 102(b).
`
`B.
`
`Grounds for Challenge
`
`Petitioner requests cancellation of Claim 35 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
`
`{$103. This Petition, supported by the declaration of Uwe Kortshagen, Ph.D.
`
`(“Kortshagen Declaration” or “Kortshagen Decl.” (Ex. 1202)) filed herewith,2
`
`demonstrates that there is a reasonable likelihood that Petitioner will prevail with
`
`respect to claim 35 and that claim 35 is not patentable. See 35 U.S.C. § 314(a).
`
`2 Dr. Kortshagen has been retained by Petitioner. The declaration at EX. 1202 is a
`
`copy of Dr. Kortshagen’s declaration filed in IPR2014—00923, discussed above.
`
`3
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`C.
`
`Legal Principles
`
`The challenged claim is unpatentable because it is obvious under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 103. A claim is invalid if it would have been obvious—that is,
`
`if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and
`
`the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have
`
`been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having
`
`ordinary skill in the art to which [the] subject matter pertains.
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103; see also Rockwell Int ’1 Corp. v. United States, 147 F.3d 1358,
`
`1364 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
`
`In KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US. 398, 415 (2007), the US.
`
`Supreme Court addressed the issue of obviousness and provided an “expansive and
`
`flexible approach” that is consistent with the “broad inquiry” set forth in Graham
`
`v. John Deere Co, 383 U.S. 1 (1966). According to the Supreme Court, a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art is “a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton,”
`
`KSR, 550 US. at 421, and “in many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to
`
`fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle.” Id. at 420.
`
`The Court held that:
`
`[w]hen there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem
`
`and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a
`
`person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options
`
`within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated
`
`success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill
`
`4
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`and common sense.
`
`In that instance the fact that a combination was
`
`obvious to try might show that it was obvious under [35 U.S.C.]
`
`§ 103.
`
`Id. at 421. Thus, KSR focused on whether a combination of known elements could
`
`be patentable if it yielded predictable results. The Court’s guidance was clear: it
`
`may not. “The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is
`
`likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results.” Id. at
`
`416. Further, “[i]f a person of ordinary skill can implement a predictable variation,
`
`§ 103 likely bars its patentability.” Id. at 417.
`
`The Board must ask, as guided by KSR, whether the challenged claim recites
`
`an improvement that is “more than the predictable use of prior art elements
`
`according to their established functions.” Id. The Board should conclude, based on
`
`the information in this Petition, that the challenged claim is merely a predictable
`
`combination of known elements that are used according to their established
`
`functions, that they are therefore unpatentable, and that an inter partes review of
`
`the challenged claims should therefore be instituted.
`
`IV. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF TECHNOLOGY
`
`The ‘652 Patent, entitled “High-Density Plasma Source Using Excited
`
`Atoms,” generally relates to the field of plasma processing. Kortshagen Dec]. 11 22
`
`(Ex. 1202). Plasma processing involves using plasma to modify the chemical and
`
`physical properties of the surface of a material. Id. (Ex. 1202).
`
`5
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`Plasma processing had been used in research and industrial applications for
`
`decades before the ’652 Patent was filed. Id. 11 23 (Ex. 1202). For example,
`
`sputtering is an industrial process that uses plasmas to deposit a thin film of a
`
`target material onto a surface called a substrate (e.g., silicon wafer during a
`
`semiconductor manufacturing operations). Id. (Ex. 1202). Ions in the plasma
`
`strike a target surface causing ejection of a small amount of target material. Id.
`
`(Ex. 1202). The ejected target material then forms a film on the substrate. Id. (Ex.
`
`1202).
`
`The use of high—density plasmas and excited atoms in plasma processing was
`
`also well-understood before the filing of the ’652 Patent. Id. 11 24 (Ex. 1202). For
`
`example, as discussed further below, Mozgrin (Ex. 1203) and Kudryavtsev (Ex.
`
`1206), developed high-density plasma processing techniques using excited atoms.
`
`Id. (Ex. 1202).
`
`A.
`
`Plasma
`
`A plasma is a collection of ions, free electrons, and neutral atoms.
`
`Kortshagen Decl. 1] 25 (Ex. 1202). 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. Id. (Ex. 1202).
`
`The “density” of a plasma refers to the number of ions or electrons that are
`
`.
`.
`1
`.
`.
`.
`present in a un1t volume, e. g., 10 2 10ns per cub1c centlmeter, or 10
`
`12 .
`-3
`10ns cm . Id.
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`11 26 (Ex. 1202). By way of comparison, there are approximately 1019 atoms in a
`
`cubic centimeter of air at atmospheric pressure and room temperature. Id. (Ex.
`
`1202). 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. Id. (Ex. 1202).
`
`B.
`
`Excited atoms
`
`Atoms have equal numbers of protons and electrons. Kortshagen D601. 1] 27
`
`(Ex. 1202). Each electron has an associated energy state. Id. (Ex. 1202). If all of
`
`an atom’s electrons are at their lowest possible energy state, the atom is said to be
`
`in the “ground state.” Id. (Ex. 1202).
`
`If one or more of an atom’s electrons is in a state that is higher than its
`
`lowest possible state, but the atom is not ionized, then the atom is said to be an
`
`“excited atom.” Id. 11 28 (Ex. 1202). Excited atoms are electronically neutral —
`
`they have equal numbers of electrons and protons. A ground state atom can be
`
`converted to an excited atom as a result of a collision with a low energy free
`
`electron (e'). Id. (Ex. 1202).
`
`An ion is an atom that has become disassociated from one or more of its
`
`electrons, and thus has a positive charge. Id. 1] 29 (Ex. 1202). A collision between
`
`a free, high energy electron and a ground state atom or an excited atom can create
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`an ion. Id. (Ex. 1202). The ’652 Patent uses the following equations to describe
`
`production of an excited argon atom, Ar*, from a ground state argon atom, Ar, and
`
`then further conversion of the excited atom to an argon ion, Ar+z
`
`Ar + e" [9] Ar* + e"
`
`Ar* + e' [9] Ar+ + 2e"
`
`’652 Patent at 14144 (Ex. 1201).3
`
`The production of excited atoms and ions was well understood long before
`
`the ’652 Patent was filed. Kortshagen Decl. 11 30 (Ex. 1202).
`
`V.
`
`OVERVIEW OF THE ’652 PATENT
`
`A.
`
`Summary of Alleged Invention of the ’652 Patent
`
`The ’652 Patent, claim 35, relates to a high-density plasma source that
`
`creates a plasma in two stages: (i) an excited atom source with a first power
`
`supply generates an initial plasma and excited atoms from a feed gas, and (ii) a
`
`second power supply is used to “super-ionize” the initial plasma to generate a high—
`
`density plasma. Claim 35 also specifies the function of “transporting” the initial
`
`3 US. Pat. No. 7,147,759 (Ex. 1207), by the same named inventor, shows these
`
`multi-step ionization equations at 9237—5 1. There is a printing error in the ’652
`
`Patent (i.e., with empty boxes replacing arrows), but the equations are shown
`
`correctly in the ’759 Patent.
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`plasma with excited atoms from a first location where they are generated to a
`
`separate location where the high density plasma is generated.
`
`The ’652 Patent has multiple embodiments in which an initial plasma and
`
`excited atoms are created at a first location, and then transported to a second
`
`location where a second power supply provides high power pulses. See, e.g., ’652
`
`Patent at FIG. 2 and description at 5:43 et seq.; FIG. 12 and description at 25:30 et
`
`seq. (Ex. 1201).
`
`In the FIG. 12 embodiment, the first location, excited atom source 732b
`
`(annotated in color below), is powered by a first power supply 731. Id. at 2:52—55
`
`(Ex. 1201):
`
`
`
`FIG. 12 of ’652 Patent (Ex. 1201)
`
`The excited atom source 732b generates an initial plasma and excited atoms. Id.
`
`at 25:35-38 (“The excited atom source 732 b generates an initial plasma and
`
`excited atoms including metastable atoms from ground state atoms supplied by a
`
`9
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`volume of feed gas 234.”) (Ex. 1201). The excited atom source 732b directs the
`
`initial plasma and excited atoms through a skimmer 736 to an area proximate
`
`cathode 732a. See, e. g., id. at 27:18-21 (“A large fraction of the ions and electrons
`
`are trapped in the nozzle chamber 738 while the excited atoms and the ground state
`
`atoms flow through the aperture 737 of the skimmer 736.”) (Ex. 1201). The
`
`skimmer is designed to block most of the electrons and ions, but it allows the
`
`ground state and excited atoms to pass through to cathode section 732a. Id. (Ex.
`
`1201). The excited atom source is configured such that a continued flow of gas
`
`causes the initial plasma and excited atoms to be moved (“transported”) from the
`
`skimmer to the second location proximate to cathode 732a and anode 706. See id.
`
`at FIG. 12 (Ex. 1201).
`
`At the second location proximate to cathode 732a and anode 706, a second
`
`power supply 222 generates an electric field that is said to “super-ionize” the
`
`plasma of feed gas generated by the excited atom source. Id. at 27:15-32 (“After a
`
`sufficient volume of excited atoms including metastable atoms is present
`
`proximate to the inner cathode section 732a ..., the second power supply 222
`
`generates an electric field (not shown) proximate to the volume of excited atoms
`
`[that] super-ionizes the initial plasma. . ..”) (Ex. 1201). The ’652 Patent defines the
`
`10
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`term “super-ionized” as meaning “that at least 75% of the neutral atoms in the
`
`plasma are converted to ions.” Id. at 5:8-10 (Ex. 1201).4
`
`The excited atom source 732b, which generates excited atoms from the feed
`
`gas, is distinct and in a separate location from cathode 732a, anode 706, and power
`
`supply 222, which “super—ionize” the plasma. The ’652 Patent explains, for
`
`example, that multiple excited atoms sources can be used, in which case they could
`
`surround the separate portion of the system that converts the initial plasma to a
`
`super-ionized high—density plasma: “Skilled artisans will appreciate that multiple
`
`excited atom sources (not shown) can surround the inner cathode section 732a.”
`
`Id. at 25:42-44 (Ex. 1201).
`
`The ’652 patent does not disclose how specifically to generate a super-
`
`ionized plasma other than to raise the energy. For example, in the discussion of
`
`FIG. 12, the ’652 patent merely states that the “electric field super-ionizes the
`
`4 The “super-ionized” plasma is of the initial plasma generated from the feed gas
`
`and not a plasma of other materials. For example, in a sputtering process, it is
`
`known that systems can get significant ionization of sputtered metal. See, e.g.,
`
`Wang at 5:62—65 (“It is anticipated that the copper ionization fraction using the
`
`Torpedo magnetron will be well over 80% at these high peak powers”) (Ex. 1204);
`
`Kortshagen Decl. ll 33, Fn. 2 (Ex. 1202).
`
`ll
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`initial plasma by raising the energy of the initial plasma including the volume of
`
`excited atoms which causes collisions between neutral atoms, electrons, and
`
`excited atoms including metastable atoms in the initial plasma.” Id. at 27:27-32
`
`(Ex. 1201).
`
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`A.
`
`Introduction
`
`A claim in inter partes review is given the “broadest reasonable construction
`
`in light of the specification.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b). Any claim term that lacks a
`
`definition in the specification is therefore also given a broad interpretation.5 In re
`
`ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 496 F.3d 1374, 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Should the
`
`Patent Owner, in order to avoid the prior art, contend that the claim has a
`
`construction different from its broadest reasonable interpretation, the appropriate
`
`course is for the Patent Owner to seek to amend the claim to expressly correspond
`
`to its contentions in this proceeding. See 77 Fed. Reg. 48764 (Aug. 14, 2012).
`
`5 Petitioner adopts the “broadest reasonable construction” standard as required by
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b). Petitioner reserves the right to pursue different
`
`constructions in a district court, where a different standard is applicable.
`
`12
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`B.
`
`“means for generating an initial plasma and excited atoms from a
`volume of feed gas”
`
`1 .
`
`Function
`
`The function is “generating both an initial plasma and excited atoms from a
`
`volume of feed gas.” Kortshagen Decl. 1] 38 (Ex. 1202).
`
`It is well known that any plasma of the type generated using techniques in
`
`the ’652 Patent will have some amount of ground state atoms, excited atoms,
`
`electrons and ions. Id. 1] 38 (Ex. 1202). To give meaning to the claim language
`
`that generates “an initial plasma and excited atoms,
`
`”6 this function should be
`
`understood to refer to generating an initial plasma along with some additional
`
`amount of excited atoms. Id. (Ex. 1202). The ’652 Patent generates additional
`
`excited atoms relative to the rest of the plasma by blocking some of the ions and
`
`electrons in the plasma, e.g., with a skimmer (Fig. 12). Id. (Ex. 1202). When the
`
`plasma is transported from the means for generating, it will have more excited
`
`atoms than it otherwise would. Id. (Ex. 1202). According to the ’652 Patent,
`
`“[t]he excited atoms can increase the density of the plasma. Since excited atoms
`
`generally require less energy to ionize than ground state gas atoms, a volume of
`
`excited atoms can generate a higher density plasma than a similar volume of
`
`6 All bold/italics emphasis is added.
`
`13
`
`

`

`ground state feed gas atoms for the same input energy.” ’652 Patth at 6:45-50
`
`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`(Ex. 1201).
`
`2.
`
`Structure
`
`There are two types of corresponding structures for the “means for
`
`generating”
`
`(1) an excited atom source (FIG. 12); and
`
`(2) a gap structure (e.g., FIGS. 2-6).
`
`Kortshagen Dec]. 1] 39 (Ex. 1202).
`
`The first structure corresponding to the function is excited atom source 732b
`
`shown in Figure 12 and described at 25:30-28:16, with the structure identified
`
`more specifically at 25:60-26:15 (Ex. 1201). Kortshagen Decl. 11 41 (Ex. 1202);
`
`see also Section V.A., supra.
`
`The second structure corresponding to the function is shown in Figure 2 and
`
`other figures with a similar gap structure along with some “configuration” to
`
`generate excited atoms and includes :
`
`0
`
`a gap 212 or region 214 defined by: (a) an outer cathode section
`
`(202b, 658, 702b, or 724); and (b) an anode (210, 656b, or 722b)
`
`spaced apart from the cathode; and
`
`0
`
`a first power supply 206 which is distinct and separate from the
`
`power supply (“second power supply” 222) used to super-ionize the
`
`14
`
`

`

`plasma (“The first power supply can be a DC, AC, or a RF power
`
`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`supply.” ’652 Patent at 924—5 (Ex. 1201)).
`
`Kortshagen Decl. 11 42 (Ex. 1202).
`
`C.
`
`“means for transporting the initial plasma and excited atoms
`proximate to a cathode assembly”
`
`1 .
`
`Function
`
`The function is “moving the initial plasma and excited atoms from where
`
`they were generated to a location near a cathode assembly.” Kortshagen Decl. 11 43
`
`(EX. 1202).
`
`A plain reading of this function is that the initial plasma with excited atoms
`
`is generated in one location (as discussed above, in a gap or with an “excited atom
`
`source” ), and moved to another location near a cathode assembly where the
`
`plasma is super—ionized. Id. 1] 44 (Ex. 1202).
`
`2.
`
`Structure
`
`The structures for performing the function are a gas exchange system 238,
`
`242 that flows gas through the outer cathode sections 202b/656b/702b/722b/732b
`
`(shown, e.g., in Figures 2, 3, 5, 6 and 12), through gap 214, toward inner cathode
`
`assembly 202a/732a. See ’652 Patent at 821—28; 10:8—17; 14:37-43; 17:63-18:9;
`
`21 :63-22z8; 27:15-20 (Ex. 1201); see also Kortshagen Decl. 11 45 (Ex. 1202).
`
`Because the “means for generating” already includes a cathode, the “cathode
`
`assembly” referred to in the “means for transporting” — that is, the location to
`
`15
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`which the initial plasma is transported — must refer to a different cathode from the
`
`structure that corresponds to the “means for generating.” Kortshagen Decl. 1] 46
`
`(Ex. 1202). The embodiments shown in all the figures consist of an “outer”
`
`cathode and an “inner” cathode. See, e.g., ’652 Patent at 5:43-55; 12:49—50; 16:11-
`
`20; 19:37—42; 20:20-25; 21:22—35; 22:48-57; 24:66-25:11; and FIGS. 2A, 2B, 3, 5,
`
`6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 (Ex. 1201). The inner cathode is the “cathode assembly” to
`
`which the initial plasma is transported. Kortshagen Decl. 11 46 (Ex. 1202).
`
`D.
`
`“means for super-ionizing the initial plasma proximate to the
`cathode assembly”
`
`1 .
`
`Function
`
`Super-ionizing is defined to mean that “at least 75% of the neutral atoms in
`
`the plasma are converted to ions.” ’652 Patent, 528-10 (EX. 1201). Therefore, the
`
`function of the means described above is “converting at least 75% of the neutral
`
`atoms in the initial plasma into ions near the cathode assembly.” Kortshagen Decl.
`
`11 47 (Ex. 1202).
`
`In related district court litigation, Patent Owner has similarly proposed
`
`construing “super-ionizing” to mean “converting at least 75% of the neutral atoms
`
`in the plasma to ions.” Plaintiff Zond LLC’s Preliminary Proposed Claim
`
`Constructions, Civil Action No. 13—cv-11634-WGY at 3 (EX. 1213).
`
`16
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`2.
`
`Structure
`
`The corresponding structures are a second power supply 222, separate from
`
`the first power supply which generates the initial plasma. Id. 1] 49 (Ex. 1202). The
`
`second power supply 222 generates an electric field across inner cathode 202a
`
`(e.g., Fig. 2A, 2B, 3, 5, and 6) or inner cathode 732a (Fig. 12); and inner anode 226
`
`or 658 (e.g., Fig. 2A, 2B, 3, 5 and 6) or inner anode 706 (Fig. 12). See, e.g., ’652
`
`Patent at 7:20—29; 16:33—41; 18:10—21;20:48-56;22:9—16;27:23-37(EX. 1201); see
`
`also Kortshagen Decl. 1T 49 (Ex. 1202).
`
`VII. OVERVIEW OF THE PRIMARY PRIOR ART REFERENCES
`
`A.
`
`Summary of the prior art
`
`As explained in detail below, limitation—by-limitation, there is nothing new
`
`or non—obvious in Zond’s claim. Kortshagen Decl. 1] 50 (EX. 1202).
`
`B.
`
`Overview of Mozgrin
`
`Mozgrin discloses a high density plasma source. Fig. 7 of Mozgrin, copied
`
`below, shows the current-voltage characteristic (“CVC”) of a plasma discharge
`
`generated by Mozgrin.
`
`l7
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Parl‘es Review
`
`U. V
`500- 1000
`
`
`
`0
`
`15-225
`
`1000—1800 LA
`
`Fig. 7. Generalized ampere-voltaic characteristic CVC of
`quasi-stationary discharge.
`
`As shown, Mozgrin divides this CVC into four distinct regions.
`
`Mozgrin calls region 1 “pre-ionization.” Mozgrin at 402, right col, 1] 2
`
`(“Part 1 in the voltage oscillogram represents the voltage of the stationary
`
`discharge (pm-ionization stage).”) (Ex. 1203).
`
`Mozgrin calls region 2 “high current magnetron discharge.” Mozgrin at 409,
`
`left col, 1] 4 (“The implementation of the high-current magnetron discharge
`
`(regime 2). . .”) (Ex. 1203). Application of a high voltage to the pre—ionized plasma
`
`causes the transition from region 1 to 2. Kortshagen Decl. 1] 53 (Ex. 1202).
`
`Mozgrin teaches that region 2 is useful for sputtering. Mozgrin at 403, right col, 1]
`
`4 (“Regime 2 was characterized by an intense cathode sputtering. . .”) (Ex. 1203).
`
`Mozgrin calls region 3 “high current diffuse discharge.” Mozgrin at 409, left
`
`col, fl 5 (“The high-current difi"use discharge (regime 3). . .”) (EX. 1203).
`
`Increasing the current applied to the “high—current magnetron discharge” (region 2)
`
`causes the plasma to transition to region 3. Kortshagen Decl. 1] 54 (Ex. 1202).
`
`Mozgrin also teaches that region 3 is useful for etching, i.e., removing material
`
`18
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`from a surface. Mozgrin at 409, left col, 1] 5 (“The high-current diffuse discharge
`
`(regime 3) is useful
`
`Hence, it can enhance the efficiency of ionic etching. . .”)
`
`(Ex. 1203). See also Kortshagen Decl. 11 54 (EX. 1202).
`
`Mozgrin’s region 4 is the arc region. Mozgrin teaches avoiding arcs by, for
`
`example, limiting the current so that the plasma will remain in the arc-free regions
`
`2 (sputtering) or 3 (etching). Kortshagen Decl. 1] 55 (EX. 1202).
`
`In Mozgrin’s sputtering region, i.e., region 2, the plasma density exceeded
`
`1013 cm'3. Mozgrin at 409, left col, 1} 4 (“The implementation of the high-current
`
`magnetron discharge (regime 2) in sputtering
`
`plasma density (exceeding
`
`2x1 013 cm'3).”) (Ex. 1203). In Mozgrin’s region 3, the plasma density is even
`
`higher. Mozgrin at 409, left col, 1] 5 (“The high—current diffuse discharge (regime
`
`3) is useful for producing large-volume uniform dense plasmas n,-_=
`
`1.5x1015cm3. . .”) (Ex. 1203). This density in region 3 is three orders of magnitude
`
`greater than what the ’652 Patent describes as “high-density.” ’652 Patent at
`
`10:62-63 (“[T]he peak plasma density of the high—density plasma is greater than
`
`—3”
`about 1012 cm ). Mozgrin took into account the teachings of Kudryavtsev.
`
`Mozgrin at 401, 11 spanning left and right cols. (“Designing the unit, we took into
`
`account the dependences which had been obtained in [Kudryavtsev] . . .”) (EX.
`
`1203)
`
`19
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`C.
`
`Overview of Kudryavtsev
`
`Kudryavtsev is a technical paper that studies the ionization of a plasma with
`
`voltage pulses. See, e. g, Kudryavtsev at 30, left col. 1] 1 (EX. 1206). 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. 1206). The second
`
`process is multi-step ionization, which Kudryavtsev calls stepwise ionization. See,
`
`e.g., id. (Ex. 1206). Kudryavtsev notes that under certain conditions multi—step
`
`ionization can be a dominant ionization process. See, e.g., id. (Ex. 1206).
`
`Kudryavtsev discusses the mechanism of multi-step ionization with excited
`
`atoms. Referring to the annotated copy of Kudryavtsev’s Fig. 1 copied below,
`
`ionization occurs with an initial “slow stage” (Fig 1a) followed by a “fast stage”
`
`(Fig. 1b).
`
`Slow Stage
`
`Fast Stage
`
`Direct ionization
`
`Multi-step ionization
`
`Generation of excited atoms
`
`Kudryavtsev at 31, right col, 1] 7 (EX. 1206). Kortshagen Decl. 11 58 (Ex. 1202).
`
`During the initial slow stage, direct ionization provides a significant
`
`contribution to the generation of plasma ions (see arrow F16 colored in green
`
`20
`
`

`

`U.S. PATENT 6,806,652
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`showing ionization (top line labeled “e”) from the ground state (bottom line
`labeled “l”)). Kor