U.S. Patent No. 7,128,988
`Declaration in Support of Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`TDK Corporation,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`Lambeth Magnetic Structures, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 7,128,988
`Issue Date: October 31, 2006
`Title: MAGNETIC MATERIAL STRUCTURES,
`DEVICES AND METHODS
`_______________
`Inter Partes Review No. _____
`____________________________________________________________
`DECLARATION OF DR. ROBERT SINCLAIR IN SUPPORT OF
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 et seq.
`
`
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 1
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 
`I. 
`BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS ................................................. 2 
`II. 
`III.  MATERIALS CONSIDERED ........................................................................ 5 
`IV.  LEGAL STANDARDS ................................................................................... 6 
`V. 
`BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE ’988 PATENT ................................................ 9 
`A. 
`Summary of the ’988 Patent .................................................................. 9 
`B. 
`’988 Patent Prosecution History .......................................................... 11 
`C. 
`’988 Patent Claims .............................................................................. 13 
`D. 
`’988 Patent Filing Date ....................................................................... 24 
`VI.  STATE OF THE ART ................................................................................... 24 
`VII.  ANALYSIS OF THE PRIOR ART ............................................................... 32 
`A. 
`J. Shen, M. Klaua, P. Ohresser, H. Jenniches, J. Barthel, Ch. V.
`Mohan, J. Kirschner, “Structural and magnetic phase transitions
`of Fe on stepped Cu (111),” Phys. Rev. B 56, 17 (1997)
`(“Shen”) ............................................................................................... 34 
`U.S. Patent No. 6,023,395 to Dill et al. (“Dill”) ................................. 37 
`B. 
`U.S. Patent No. 5,465,185 (“Heim”) ................................................... 42 
`C. 
`D.  D.N. Lambeth, W. Yang, H. Gong, D.E. Laughlin, B. Lu, L.L.
`Lee, J. Zou, P.S. Harllee, “Magnetic Media Performance:
`Control Methods for Crystalline Texture and Orientation,” Mat.
`Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. Vol. 517, 181-192 (1998) (“Lambeth I”) ....... 42 
`U.S. Patent No. 5,862,022 to Noguchi et al. (“Noguchi”) .................. 44 
`E. 
`VIII.  SHEN, ALONE OR IN COMBINATION WITH DILL, RENDERS
`OBVIOUS CLAIMS 1 AND 27 OF THE ’988 PATENT ............................ 45 
`A. 
`Claim Charts ........................................................................................ 45 
`B. 
`Shen, Alone or in Combination With Dill, Renders Obvious
`Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 45 
`Shen, Alone or in Combination With Dill, Renders Obvious
`Claim 27 .............................................................................................. 53 
`
`C. 
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 2
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`IX.  DILL, IN COMBINATION WITH SHEN ALONE OR IN
`FURTHER COMBINATION WITH HEIM, RENDERS OBVIOUS
`CLAIMS 1, 3, 6-19, 21-24, 27-30, 34 AND 38 OF THE
`’988 PATENT ................................................................................................ 54 
`A. 
`Claim Charts ........................................................................................ 54 
`B. 
`Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 1 ................ 54 
`C. 
`Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 3 ................ 64 
`D.  Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 6 ................ 65 
`E. 
`Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 7 ................ 65 
`F. 
`Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 8 ................ 66 
`G.  Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 9 ................ 68 
`H.  Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 10 .............. 70 
`I. 
`Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 11 .............. 70 
`J. 
`Dill in Combination With Shen and Heim Renders Obvious
`Claim 12 .............................................................................................. 72 
`K.  Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 13 .............. 74 
`L. 
`Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 14 .............. 76 
`M.  Dill in Combination With Shen and Heim Renders Obvious
`Claim 15 .............................................................................................. 78 
`N.  Dill in Combination With Shen and Heim Renders Obvious
`Claim 16 .............................................................................................. 82 
`O.  Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 17 .............. 85 
`P. 
`Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 18 .............. 86 
`Q.  Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 19 .............. 86 
`R. 
`Dill in Combination With Shen and Heim Renders Obvious
`Claim 21 .............................................................................................. 87 
`Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 22 .............. 89 
`Dill in Combination With Shen and Heim Renders Obvious
`Claim 23 .............................................................................................. 90 
`U.  Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 24 .............. 92 
`V.  Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 27 .............. 92 
`
`S. 
`T. 
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 3
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`W.  Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 28 .............. 93 
`X.  Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 29 .............. 93 
`Y.  Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 30 .............. 94 
`Z. 
`Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 34 .............. 94 
`AA.  Dill in Combination With Shen Renders Obvious Claim 38 .............. 95 
`X.  DILL IN COMBINATION WITH SHEN AND LAMBETH I
`RENDERS OBVIOUS CLAIMS 2, 25, 26, AND 31 OF THE
`’988 PATENT ................................................................................................ 96 
`A. 
`Claim Chart ......................................................................................... 96 
`B. 
`Dill in Combination With Shen and Lambeth I Renders
`Obvious Claim 2 .................................................................................. 96 
`Dill in Combination With Shen and Lambeth I Renders
`Obvious Claim 25 ................................................................................ 98 
`D.  Dill in Combination With Shen and Lambeth I Renders
`Obvious Claim 26 ................................................................................ 99 
`Dill in Combination With Shen and Lambeth I Renders
`Obvious Claim 31 .............................................................................. 102 
`XI.  DILL IN COMBINATION WITH SHEN AND NOGUCHI
`RENDERS OBVIOUS CLAIM 39 OF THE ’988 PATENT ..................... 103 
`A. 
`Claim Chart ....................................................................................... 103 
`B. 
`Dill in Combination With Shen and Noguchi Renders Obvious
`Claim 39 ............................................................................................ 103 
`XII.  CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 105 
`
`
`C. 
`
`E. 
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 4
`
`

`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`Exhibit List for Declaration of Dr. Robert Sinclair
`
`Exhibit Description
`
`Exhibit
`
`PCT Publication No. WO 03/021579
`Jin (U.S. Patent No. 5,998,048)
`Kadau I (K. Kadau, R. Meyer, P. Entel, “Molecular-Dynamics
`Study of Thin Iron Films on Copper,” Surface Review and Letters 6,
`1, 35-43 (1999));
`Pinarbashi (U.S. Patent No. 6,295,187)
`P. Álvarez-Alonso, A. Pérez-Checa, I.R. Aseguinolaza, J. Alonso,
`A.V. Svalov, V.A. Chernenko, J.M. Barandiarán, “Fabrication of
`Patterned Ferromagnetic Shape Memory Thin Films,” Key
`Engineering Materials, Vol. 644, pp. 219-22, May 2015.
`Pierre Villars, Material Phases Data System (MPDS), CH-6354
`Vitznau, Switzerland; SpringerMaterials; sd_0555891
`(Springer-Verlag GmbH, Heidelberg, 2014),
`http://materials.springer.com/isp/crystallographic/docs/sd_0555891
`originally accessed: 29-08-2015; copy dated 19_09_2015.
`W. F. Smith “Principles of Materials Science and Engineering”
`McGraw-Hill, New York (1990, 1996), p. 94 et seq.;
`Metals Handbook, Volume 8, American Society for Metals, p. 251 et
`seq. (1973)
`L. J. Swartzendruber et al., J. of Phase Equilibria, vol. 12,
`pp. 288-312 (1991);
`Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Robert Sinclair
`
`A
`B
`C
`
`D
`E
`
`F
`
`G
`
`H
`
`I
`
`J
`
`i
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 5
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`1.
`
`I, Robert Sinclair, Ph.D., submit the following declaration (the
`
`“Declaration”) in connection with the proceeding identified above.
`
`I.
`
`2.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`I have been retained by counsel for TDK Corporation (“TDK”) as a
`
`technical expert in connection with the proceeding identified above. I submit this
`
`Declaration in support of Petitioner TDK’s Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`(“Petition”) of United States Patent No. 7,128,988 (“the ’988 patent”) (Ex. 1001)
`
`against Patent Owner Lambeth Magnetic Structures, LLC (“Lambeth”). All
`
`“Ex. 10__” cites herein are to the Exhibits to the Petition. All “Ex. _” cites with
`
`letters A through I herein are to Exhibits to this Declaration.
`
`3.
`
`I understand that Lambeth has filed a patent infringement lawsuit in
`
`the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania alleging
`
`infringement by Toshiba Corporation, Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc.,
`
`Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc., and Toshiba Of Canada, Ltd.
`
`(collectively “Toshiba”) of claims 1, 3, 6, 8, 11, 12, 17, 19, 23, 27, 28, and 29 (the
`
`“asserted claims”) of the ’988 patent. Lambeth Magnetic Structures, LLC v.
`
`Toshiba Corp., Civil Action No. 2:14-cv-01526-CB (W.D. Pa.).
`
`4.
`
`For the purposes of this Declaration, I will address the asserted claims
`
`of the ’988 patent and selected other claims of the ’988 patent. I have omitted
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 6
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`from my analysis several claims that, in my view, cannot reasonably be asserted
`
`against Toshiba. However, inclusion of a claim in my analysis is not an indication
`
`that I believe it could reasonably be asserted against Toshiba. If, at any time in the
`
`future, additional claims are asserted by Lambeth against Toshiba, I reserve the
`
`right to amend or supplement this Declaration accordingly.
`
`II. BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`
`5. My curriculum vitae is attached (Ex. J). I am a professor of Materials
`
`Science and Engineering at Stanford University. At Stanford, I head a research
`
`group studying microelectronic and magnetic thin film microstructure. We
`
`primarily use transmission electron microscopy (“TEM”) to image materials of
`
`interest at the atomic level. Doing so provides microstructural information
`
`necessary for the understanding of structural, electrical, and magnetic properties of
`
`those materials. We routinely examine materials of interest both to magnetic data
`
`storage and devices relating to that application.
`
`6.
`
`I joined the faculty of the Department of Materials Science and
`
`Engineering at Stanford in 1977. I have been a professor there ever since. I have
`
`also directed Stanford’s Nanocharacterization Lab from 2002-2013. I became the
`
`Chair of the Department of Materials Science and Engineering in 2004 and served
`
`in that capacity until 2014. During the time I have been at Stanford, my research
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 7
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`has touched on various aspects of magnetic materials, materials used in the context
`
`of data storage, and thin film deposition.
`
`7.
`
`Prior to being at Stanford, I held research positions at the University
`
`of Newcastle-upon-Tyne and the University of California, Berkeley. Before that, I
`
`received my B.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Materials Science from Cambridge
`
`University (UK).
`
`8.
`
`I have authored around 250 refereed, scientific journal articles and
`
`over 200 conference proceedings in materials and physical science. Of these, I
`
`would estimate that approximately 30 percent directly or indirectly concern
`
`magnetic materials and/or thin film applications of magnetic materials. I have also
`
`authored six edited works and seven book chapters. Several of these touched upon
`
`some aspect of magnetic materials and/or thin film deposition.
`
`9.
`
`For my research and work as an educator, I have received a number of
`
`awards. These awards include the Robert Lansing Hardy Gold Medal of the
`
`Metallurgical Society of the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and
`
`Petroleum Engineers (AIME), the Eli Franklin Burton Award of the Electron
`
`Microscopy Society of America, an Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Fellowship, and
`
`the Marcus E. Grossman Award of the American Society for Metals. I have also
`
`received two awards for Excellence in Undergraduate Teaching at Stanford, and
`
`most recently the Distinguished Scientist Award (Physical Sciences) of the
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 8
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`Microscopy Society of America in 2009, and the David M. Turnbull Lectureship of
`
`the Materials Research Society in 2012.
`
`10.
`
`In addition, I am very active in several professional societies. These
`
`societies include the Materials Research Society (MRS) and the Microscopy
`
`Society of America (MSA). I am also active in the organization of symposia and
`
`workshops on electron microscopy. Recent examples include the workshops on
`
`“Advanced and In Situ Microscopies of Functional Nanomaterials and Devices
`
`(IAMNano)” held in Krakow, Poland (2012), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (2014), and
`
`Hamburg, Germany (2015) and the international conferences on “Remote Electron
`
`Microscopy and In Situ Studies,” held at Stanford University (2008), Gothenburg,
`
`Sweden (2010), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (2011), and Lisbon, Portugal (2013). I
`
`have also organized numerous symposia at electron microscopy and materials
`
`research conferences and workshops. I was also invited to serve as Chair of the
`
`U.S. National Research Council’s Committee on Smaller Facilities from
`
`2003-2006, which is a rare responsibility on behalf of the National Academy of
`
`Sciences (NAS). This culminated in a 230 page report entitled “Midsize Facilities:
`
`Infrastructure for Materials Research” published by NAS in 2006.
`
`11. During my tenure at Stanford University, I have been actively
`
`involved in teaching and education, as well as scientific research, at both the
`
`undergraduate and graduate level. For instance, I have taught a course on
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 9
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`“Introduction to Materials Science” to undergraduates since 1977, which includes
`
`the structure and magnetic properties of materials and has involved approximately
`
`3,000 students over the years. Likewise I have taught graduate courses on “Atomic
`
`Arrangements in Solids,” “Nanocharacterization of Materials,” and “Transmission
`
`Electron Microscopy.”
`
`12.
`
`I am being paid at an hourly rate for my work on this matter. I have
`
`no personal or financial stake or interest in the outcome of the present proceeding.
`
`III. MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`
`13.
`
`I have considered information from various sources in forming my
`
`opinions. Besides drawing from almost three decades of research and development
`
`in the area of distributed computing systems, I also have reviewed the following
`
`documents: (a) the ’988 patent (Ex. 1001); (b) the prosecution file history of the
`
`’988 patent (including Ex. 1002); (c) PCT Publication No. WO 03/021579, the
`
`publication of international application, PCT /US02/27327, to which the
`
`’988 patent claims priority (Ex. A); (d) J. Shen, M. Klaua, P. Ohresser,
`
`H. Jenniches, J. Barthel, Ch. V. Mohan, J. Kirschner, “Structural and magnetic
`
`phase transitions of Fe on stepped Cu (111),” Phys. Rev. B 56, 17, 134-143 (1997)
`
`(“Shen”) (Ex. 1011); (e) U.S. Patent No. 6,023,395 (“Dill”) (Ex. 1009); (f) U.S.
`
`Patent No. 5,998,048 (“Jin”) (Ex. B); (g) K. Kadau, R. Meyer, P. Entel,
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 10
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`“Molecular-Dynamics Study of Thin Iron Films on Copper,” Surface Review and
`
`Letters 6, 1, 35-43 (1999) (“Kadau I”) (Ex. C); (h) D.N. Lambeth, W. Yang,
`
`H. Gong, D.E. Laughlin, B. Lu, L.L. Lee, J. Zou, P.S. Harllee, “Magnetic Media
`
`Performance: Control Methods for Crystalline Texture and Orientation,” Mat. Res.
`
`Soc. Symp. Proc. Vol. 517, 181 192 (1998) (“Lambeth I”) (Ex. 1013); (i) U.S.
`
`Patent No. 5,862,022 (“Noguchi”) (Ex. 1014); (j) U.S. Patent No. 6,295,187
`
`(“Pinarbashi”) (Ex. D); (k) U.S. Patent No. 5,465,185 (“Heim”) (Ex. 1012);
`
`(l) TDK’s Petition for Inter Partes Review of the ’988 patent (the “Petition”), to
`
`which this Declaration is being submitted as Exhibit No. 1006; and (m) the other
`
`documents and references as cited herein. I reviewed the Petition in detail and
`
`agree with both its analysis and conclusions.
`
`IV. LEGAL STANDARDS
`
`14.
`
`I have relied on instructions from counsel as to the applicable legal
`
`standards to use in arriving at my opinions in this Declaration.
`
`15.
`
`I have been informed and understand that patent claims are construed
`
`from the perspective of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed
`
`invention was made and that, during this proceeding, claims are to be given their
`
`broadest reasonable construction consistent with the specification.
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 11
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`16.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a patent claim is invalid
`
`because of anticipation when every element of the claim is described in a single
`
`prior art reference, such that the elements are arranged as required by the claim. I
`
`have been informed and understand that the description of a claim element in a
`
`prior art reference can be express or inherent. For a prior art reference to describe
`
`a claim element inherently, the claim element must be necessarily present.
`
`Probabilities are not sufficient to establish inherency.
`
`17.
`
`I have also been informed and understand that the subject matter of a
`
`patent claim is obvious if the differences between the subject matter of the claim
`
`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. I have also been informed that the
`
`framework for determining obviousness involves considering the following
`
`factors: (i) the scope and content of the prior art; (ii) the differences between the
`
`prior art and the claimed subject matter; (iii) the level of ordinary skill in the art;
`
`and (iv) any objective evidence of non-obviousness.
`
`18.
`
`I further understand that the claimed subject matter would have been
`
`obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art if, for example, it results from the
`
`combination of known elements according to known methods to yield predictable
`
`results, the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 12
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`predictable results, the use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the
`
`same way, or the application of a known technique to a known device ready for
`
`improvement to yield predictable results. I have also been informed that the
`
`analysis of obviousness may include recourse to logic, judgment, and common
`
`sense available to the person of ordinary skill in the art that does not necessarily
`
`require explication in any reference. I understand that so-called “secondary
`
`considerations of non-obviousness,” must be considered in an obviousness
`
`analysis. I understand that an analysis including these secondary considerations
`
`helps to prevent the forbidden use of hindsight in determining whether a patent
`
`claim is obvious. I understand that secondary considerations of non-obviousness
`
`include: (a) a long-felt but unresolved need for the invention; (b) commercial
`
`success of the invention; (c) copying of the invention; (d) praise and recognition of
`
`the invention by others; (e) licensing of the rights to the invention; and
`
`(f) unexpected results. In rendering my opinions, I followed these guidelines.
`
`19.
`
`In my opinion, a person of ordinary skill in the art pertaining to the
`
`’988 patent at the relevant date would have an undergraduate degree in materials
`
`science, physics, or chemistry, and two to four years of experience in the design of
`
`magnetic materials. Relevant professional or practical experience or degrees in
`
`other subject areas where a person would gain experience with distributed
`
`computing systems may also suffice.
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 13
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`20. Based on my education and experience in the field of materials
`
`science set forth above, I believe I am qualified to provide opinions about how one
`
`of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time would have interpreted and
`
`understood the ’988 patent and the prior art discussed herein.
`
`V. BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE ’988 PATENT
`
`A.
`
`Summary of the ’988 Patent
`
`21. The ’988 patent (Ex. 1001), titled “Magnetic Material Structures,
`
`Devices and Methods,” issued from the national stage of International Patent
`
`Application No. PCT/US02/27327, which was filed on August 29, 2002. The
`
`’988 patent entered the national stage in the United States under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 371 (c) on August 29, 2003. The ’988 patent issued on October 31, 2006.
`
`22. The ’988 patent is directed to “a structure to achieve uniaxial
`
`magnetocrystalline orientation via the use of the (110) texture of body centered
`
`cubic (bcc) or body centered cubic derivative crystal thin film structures.”
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 14
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`(Ex. 1001, 12:58-13:2.)1 In particular, the ’988 patent describes “the invention” as
`
`“orientation control of bcc and bcc derivative materials.” (Ex. 1001, 13:4-8.) “The
`
`invention” is applied in various devices to cause “good orientation, high
`
`magnetization, high permeability and low losses.” (Ex. 1001, 13:4-8.)
`
`23. The ’988 patent focuses on achieving “uniaxial [magnetic]
`
`anisotropy,” which the ’988 patent defines as the situation in which the “anisotropy
`
`energy density function only contains a single maximum and a single minimum”
`
`when the magnetization angle is rotated 180º. (Ex. 1001, 1:56-60.) The
`
`’988 patent explains that whether or not a thin magnetic film will exhibit uniaxial
`
`anisotropy is related to film structure, specifically to the presence and orientations
`
`of so-called crystallographic “variants.” (Id., 14:34-55.) Variants form as thin,
`
`crystal films grow epitaxially on a particular surface. (Id.) Different crystal
`
`variants tend to form during formation of the films in order to minimize the
`
`interfacial and surface energy of the newly forming film. It is possible to influence
`
`
`1 The ’988 patent uses the term “bcc-d” structure, which the ’988 patent
`
`defines as “either a bcc or a bcc derivative crystal structure.” (Ex. 1001,
`
`14:66-67.) One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood this phrase to
`
`denote an elemental crystal having a bcc structure or a crystalline compound
`
`having a structure that is based on the bcc structure.
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 15
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`or determine the number and type of variants by controlling various parameters
`
`during the film deposition process. (Id., 14:48-65.)
`
`24. The inventor of the ’988 patent purports to have discovered an
`
`entirely new system or set of six variants in a particular film growth regime,
`
`specifically the growth of bcc-d structured films on a (111) plane surface. (Id.,
`
`14:49-53.) There is one important and allegedly unique advantage of the system.
`
`This six-variant system allegedly allows achieving uniaxial anisotropy by breaking
`
`the symmetry of the crystallographic variants. (Id., 14:49-55.) The ’988 patent
`
`asserts that prior known crystallographic variants for this materials system would
`
`not yield uniaxial anisotropy even where symmetry is broken.
`
`B.
`
`’988 Patent Prosecution History
`
`25. On August 29, 2003, Application No. 10/415,757 (the
`
`“’757 Application”) (Ex. 1002) entered the national stage in the U.S. Patent and
`
`Trademark Office (“USPTO”) under 35 U.S.C. § 371 (c). The original application
`
`had 65 total claims, including 8 independent claims. The Applicant canceled all
`
`claims and provided a new claim set via preliminary amendment on March 23,
`
`2004. On September 8, 2005, the Examiner issued a restriction requirement with
`
`respect to those claims. In response to that requirement, on September 19, 2005,
`
`the Applicant chose to prosecute the claim set directed to “magnetic material[s]
`
`structure and magnetic device.”
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 16
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`26. On December 19, 2005, the USPTO issued a Non-Final Rejection
`
`rejecting claims 118-30, 134-37, and 140-58 based on 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being
`
`anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103, as being obvious in
`
`view of Lambeth, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,248,416) (“Lambeth ’416.”).
`
`(Ex. 1003.) The Examiner also indicated that claims 131-33, 138, and 139
`
`contained allowable subject matter and further rejected claim 157 under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 112.
`
`27. On March 17, 2006, the Applicant responded to the Office Action.
`
`(Ex. 1004.) In the response, the Applicant amended claim 157 to overcome the
`
`rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112. (Id., p. 12.) The Applicant traversed the
`
`rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102/103 by arguing that Lambeth ’416 did not
`
`disclose uniaxial symmetry broken structure because Lambeth ’416 relates to the
`
`growth of an (fcc) magnetic layer. (Id., p. 14.) The Applicant argued that (fcc)
`
`magnetic structures cannot achieve such symmetry. (Id.) The Applicant further
`
`argued that, though Lambeth ’416 “did disclose the use of a (111) template under a
`
`(110) bcc layer, . . . only 3 variants were found . . . [and such a] 3 variant system
`
`will not yield the desirable uniaxial symmetry broken magnetic properties of the
`
`present invention.” (Id.) Applicant further made the statement that the “claimed
`
`substrate . . . is not considered by the Applicant to be novel.” (Id., p. 15.)
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 17
`
`

`
`
`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`28.
`
`In response to Applicant’s arguments, the Examiner issued a notice of
`
`allowance on July 28, 2006, of all pending claims directed toward the elected
`
`species. (Ex. 1005.) The only reasons given for allowance were that
`
`“Lambeth ’416 fails to teach or suggest a uniaxial symmetry broken structure and a
`
`hexagonal (111) atomic template with a bcc-d magnetic layer (see Applicant’s
`
`arguments in the response filed 3/17/06).” (Id., p. 3.) The Applicant paid the issue
`
`fee on September 13, 2006, and the ’757 Application issued as U.S. Patent
`
`No. 7,128,988 on October 31, 2006. The Applicant filed a Request for a
`
`Certificate of Correction on November 3, 2010, to add a priority claim to
`
`U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/315,920, filed on August 29, 2001. The
`
`Certificate Issued on December 7, 2010.
`
`C.
`
`’988 Patent Claims
`
`29. Lambeth has asserted independent claims 1 and 27 and dependent
`
`claims 3, 6, 8, 11, 12, 17, 19, 23, 28, and 29 of the ’988 patent against Toshiba. I
`
`understand the Petition challenges the patentability of claims 1-3, 6-19, 21-31, 34,
`
`38, and 39. I address these claims below. Claim 1 is representative of the
`
`independent claims of the ’988 patent.
`
`1. [a] A magnetic material structure comprising:
`
`a substrate;
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 18
`
`

`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`[b] at least one bcc-d layer which is magnetic,
`
`[c] forming a uniaxial
`
`[d] symmetry broken structure; and
`
`[e] at least one layer providing a (111) textured
`
`[f] hexagonal atomic template disposed between said substrate and
`
`said bcc-d layer.
`
`2. The magnetic material structure recited in claim 1, wherein said
`
`substrate is single crystal.
`
`3. The magnetic material structure recited in claim 1, wherein a
`
`surface of said substrate is amorphous or polycrystalline.
`
`6. The magnetic material structure recited in claim 1, wherein the
`
`layer providing said hexagonal atomic template is formed from a fcc-d
`
`or hcp crystalline material.
`
`7. The magnetic material structure recited in claim 1, wherein the
`
`layer providing said hexagonal atomic template is magnetic.
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 19
`
`

`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`8. The magnetic material structure recited in claim 1,
`
`wherein said bcc-d layer is epitaxially grown on said (111)
`
`textured hexagonal atomic template and has a (110) crystalline
`
`texture, and at least one crystalline grain of said (111) textured
`
`hexagonal atomic template has epitaxially grown thereon at
`
`least two and not more than four dominate (110) orientational
`
`variants.
`
`9. The magnetic material structure according to claim 1, further
`
`comprising:
`
`a second layer providing a (111) textured hexagonal atomic
`
`template, wherein said second layer is magnetic.
`
`10. The magnetic material structure according to claim 1, further
`
`comprising: a second bcc-d layer which is non-magnetic.
`
`11. The magnetic material structure according to claim 1, further
`
`comprising: a second bcc-d layer which is magnetic.
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 20
`
`

`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`12. The magnetic material structure according to claim 1, further
`
`comprising:
`
`a second bcc-d layer
`
`wherein the crystalline orientation of the second bcc-d layer is
`
`epitaxially determined by said bcc-d layer.
`
`13. The magnetic material structure according to claim 1, further
`
`comprising:
`
`a second bcc-d layer; and a second layer providing a (111)
`
`textured hexagonal atomic template wherein said second layer
`
`providing a (111) textured hexagonal atomic template is
`
`disposed between said bcc-d layers.
`
`14. The magnetic material structure according to claim 1, further
`
`comprising:
`
`a second bcc-d layer, which is magnetic; and
`
`at least one oxide layer between said bcc-d layers.
`
`16
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 21
`
`

`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`15. The magnetic material structure according to claim 1, further
`
`comprising:
`
`a second and a third bcc-d layers which are non-magnetic;
`
`a fourth bcc-d layer which is magnetic;
`
`and at least one oxide layer between said second bcc-d layer
`
`and said third bcc-d layer
`
`wherein said second and third bcc-d layers are disposed
`
`between said first and fourth bcc-d layers.
`
`16. The magnetic material structure according to claim 1, further
`
`comprising:
`
`a second bcc-d layer which is magnetic;
`
`a second (111) textured hexagonal atomic template layer
`
`between said bcc-d layers; and
`
`at least one oxide layer between said bcc-d layers.
`
`17
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TDK Corporation Exhibit 1006 Page 22
`
`

`
`Docket No.: 357040000034
`
`17. The magnetic material structure recited in claim 1, wherein said
`
`bcc-d layer forming a uniaxial symmetry broken structure is
`
`composed of Fe or FeCo or an alloy of Fe or FeCo.
`
`18. The magnetic material structure recited in claim 1, wherein said
`
`bcc-d layer forming a uniaxial symmetry broken structure is
`
`composed of an alloy of Fe or FeCo having one or more of the
`
`elements Al, B, Cr, C, Cu, Ni, N, Nb, Mo, V, Si, Ta, and Ti.
`
`19. The magnetic