UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
`INTEL CORPORATION, AND
`GLOBALFOUNDRIES U.S., INC.,
`
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`DANIEL L. FLAMM,
`
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR No. Unassigned
`U.S. Patent No. 6,017,221
`Issued: January 25, 2000
`Named Inventor: Daniel L. Flamm
`
`Title: PROCESS DEPENDING ON PLASMA DISCHARGES SUSTAINED BY
`INDUCTIVE COUPLING
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,017,221
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-.80, 42.100-.123
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`
`I. 
`II. 
`
`III. 
`
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 
`REQUIREMENTS FOR PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW ........ 2 
`A.  Grounds for Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)) ..................................... 2 
`B. 
`Notice of Real Party-In-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)) .................... 3 
`C. 
`Notice of Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2)) .............................. 3 
`D.  Designation of Lead and Back-up Counsel
`(37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3)) and Service Information
`(37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4)) ........................................................................ 4 
`Payment of Fees (37 C.F.R. § 42.103) .................................................. 6 
`E. 
`Proof of Service ..................................................................................... 6 
`F. 
`IDENTIFICATION OF CLAIMS BEING CHALLENGED .......................... 6 
`A. 
`Specific Art and Statutory Grounds on Which the Challenges to
`the Claims are Based ............................................................................. 6 
`IV.  OVERVIEW OF THE 221 Patent ................................................................... 9 
`A. 
`The 221 Patent Disclosure ..................................................................... 9 
`1. 
`Inductively-Coupled Plasma Source ........................................... 9 
`2. 
`Capactively Coupled Currents .................................................. 10 
`3. 
`Phase and Anti-Phase Portions of the Capacitively
`Coupled Currents ...................................................................... 10 
`4.  Wave Adjustment Circuit ......................................................... 14 
`PERSON HAVING ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ............................. 16 
`V. 
`VI.  CLAIM CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................... 16 
`A. 
`“selectively balanced” ......................................................................... 17 
`1. 
`Correct Construction: “selectively balanced” means
`“chosen to be made substantially equally distributed” ............. 17 
`Flamm’s Construction: “selectively balanced covers a
`range, per one’s selection, between 100% balanced to
`various lesser percentages” ....................................................... 20 
`VII.  SUMMARY OF PRIOR ART REFERENCES ............................................ 21 
`
`2. 
`
`
`
`i
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`b) 
`
`c) 
`
`A. 
`Lieberman ............................................................................................ 21 
`Dible .................................................................................................... 23 
`B. 
`Qian ..................................................................................................... 24 
`C. 
`D.  Hanawa ................................................................................................ 26 
`E. 
`Collins.................................................................................................. 27 
`VIII.  THERE IS A REASONABLE LIKELIHOOD THAT AT LEAST
`ONE CLAIM OF THE 221 PATENT IS UNPATENTABLE ..................... 27 
`A.  Ground 1: Claims 1 and 5-7 Are Rendered Obvious by
`Lieberman Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ................................................. 27 
`1. 
`Lieberman: Claim 1 .................................................................. 28 
`a) 
`[1.P] A process for fabricating a product using a
`plasma source .................................................................. 28 
`[1.1] subjecting a substrate to entities, at least one
`of said entities emanating
`from a gaseous
`discharge excited by a high frequency field from
`an inductive coupling structure....................................... 28 
`[1.2] in which a phase portion and an anti-phase
`portion of capacitive currents coupled from the
`inductive coupling
`structure are
`selectively
`balanced .......................................................................... 30 
`[1.3] wherein said inductive coupling structure is
`adjusted using a wave adjustment circuit, said
`wave adjustment circuit adjusting
`the phase
`portion and
`the anti-phase portion of
`the
`capacitively coupled currents. ........................................ 36 
`Lieberman discloses all limitations of dependent claims
`5-7 ............................................................................................. 38 
`a) 
`Claim 5: The process of claim 1 wherein said
`process is provided in a chamber .................................... 38 
`Claim 6: The process of claim 5 wherein the
`chamber is provided for a process selected from
`etching, deposition, sputtering, or implantation. ............ 39 
`Claim 7: The process of claim 1 wherein said
`inductive coupling structure provides a wave
`
`2. 
`
`d) 
`
`b) 
`
`c) 
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`B. 
`
`b) 
`
`c) 
`
`d) 
`
`multiple selected from a one-sixteenth wave, a
`one-eighth-wave, a quarter-wave, a half-wave, a
`three-quarter wave, and a full-wave. .............................. 39 
`Ground 2: Claims 1 and 5-7 Are Rendered Obvious by
`Lieberman In View of Dible Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ..................... 40 
`1. 
`Lieberman in view of Dible: Claim 1 ....................................... 41 
`a) 
`[1.P] A process for fabricating a product using a
`plasma source .................................................................. 41 
`[1.1] subjecting a substrate to entities, at least one
`of said entities emanating
`from a gaseous
`discharge excited by a high frequency field from
`an inductive coupling structure....................................... 41 
`[1.2] in which a phase portion and an anti-phase
`portion of capacitive currents coupled from the
`inductive coupling
`structure are
`selectively
`balanced .......................................................................... 42 
`[1.3] wherein said inductive coupling structure is
`adjusted using a wave adjustment circuit, said
`wave adjustment circuit adjusting
`the phase
`portion and
`the anti-phase portion of
`the
`capacitively coupled currents. ........................................ 44 
`Lieberman in view of Dible discloses all limitations of
`dependent claims 5-7 ................................................................ 45 
`a) 
`Claim 5: The process of claim 1 wherein said
`process is provided in a chamber .................................... 45 
`Claim 6: wherein the chamber is provided for a
`process
`selected
`from
`etching, deposition,
`sputtering, or implantation. ............................................. 46 
`Claim 7: wherein said inductive coupling structure
`provides a wave multiple selected from a one-
`sixteenth wave, a one-eighth-wave, a quarter-
`wave, a half-wave, a three-quarter wave, and a
`full-wave. ........................................................................ 46 
`Reasons to Combine Lieberman and Dible .............................. 46 
`
`2. 
`
`3. 
`
`b) 
`
`c) 
`
`
`
`iii
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`C. 
`
`E. 
`
`Ground 3: Claims 2-3 Are Rendered Obvious by Lieberman
`(Ground 1), or Lieberman in view of Dible (Ground 2
`Combination), in View of Hanawa Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ........... 49 
`1. 
`Lieberman (Ground 1), or Lieberman in view of Dible
`(Ground 2 Combination), in view of Hanawa teaches all
`limitations of claims 2 and 3 ..................................................... 49 
`a) 
`Claim 2: The process of claim 1 wherein the wave
`adjustment circuit selectively adjusts a frequency
`of an rf power supply ...................................................... 49 
`Claim 3: The process of claim 1 wherein the high
`frequency field
`is adjusted using a variable
`frequency power supply .................................................. 51 
`Reasons to Combine Lieberman and Hanawa .......................... 51 
`2. 
`D.  Ground 4: Claim 4 is Rendered Obvious by Lieberman in View
`of Collins, or Alternatively in view of Dible and Collins, Under
`35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ............................................................................... 56 
`1. 
`Lieberman in View of Collins teaches all limitations of
`Claim 4 ...................................................................................... 56 
`a) 
`Claim 4: The process of claim 1 wherein the wave
`adjustment circuit comprises a transmission line ........... 56 
`Reasons to Combine Lieberman and Collins ............................ 57 
`2. 
`Ground 5: Claims 1, 5-7 Are Rendered Obvious By Qian Under
`35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ............................................................................... 59 
`1. 
`Qian: Claim 1 ............................................................................ 59 
`a) 
`[1.P] A process for fabricating a product using a
`plasma source .................................................................. 59 
`[1.1] Subjecting a substrate to entities, at least one
`of said entities emanating
`from a gaseous
`discharge excited by a high frequency field from
`an inductive coupling structure....................................... 59 
`[1.2] in which a phase portion and an anti-phase
`portion of capacitive currents coupled from the
`inductive coupling
`structure are
`selectively
`balanced .......................................................................... 60 
`
`b) 
`
`b) 
`
`c) 
`
`
`
`iv
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`d) 
`
`2. 
`
`[1.3] wherein said inductive coupling structure is
`adjusted using a wave adjustment circuit, said
`wave adjustment circuit adjusting
`the phase
`portion and
`the anti-phase portion of
`the
`capacitively coupled currents. ........................................ 66 
`Qian discloses all limitations of dependent claims 5-7 ............ 67 
`a) 
`Claim 5: The process of claim 1 wherein said
`process is provided in a chamber .................................... 67 
`Claim 6: The process of claim 5 wherein the
`chamber is provided for a process selected from
`etching, deposition, sputtering, or implantation. ............ 68 
`Claim 7: The process of claim 1 wherein said
`inductive coupling structure provides a wave
`multiple selected from a one-sixteenth wave, a
`one-eighth-wave, a quarter-wave, a half-wave, a
`three-quarter wave, and a full-wave. .............................. 68 
`Ground 6: Claims 2-3 Are Rendered Obvious by Qian in View
`of Hanawa Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ................................................. 69 
`1. 
`Qian in view of Hanawa teaches all limitations of claims
`2 and 3 ....................................................................................... 69 
`a) 
`Claim 2: The process of claim 1 wherein the wave
`adjustment circuit selectively adjusts a frequency
`of an rf power supply ...................................................... 69 
`Claim 3: wherein the high frequency field is
`adjusted using a variable frequency power supply ......... 71 
`Reasons to Combine Qian and Hanawa .................................... 71 
`2. 
`G.  Ground 7: Claim 4 is Rendered Obvious by Qian in View of
`Collins Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) ....................................................... 75 
`1. 
`Qian in view of Collins discloses all limitations of claim
`4 ................................................................................................. 75 
`a) 
`Claim 4: The process of claim 1 wherein the wave
`adjustment circuit comprises a transmission line ........... 75 
`Reasons to combine Qian and Collins ...................................... 77 
`2. 
`IX.  CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 78 
`
`F. 
`
`b) 
`
`c) 
`
`b) 
`
`
`
`v
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`Exhibit List
`
`Exhibit #
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,017,221 (“221 Patent”)
`
`File History for U.S. Patent No. 6,017,221
`
`Declaration of David Graves, Ph.D. (“Graves Decl.”)
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Dr. David Graves
`
`Decision on Institution of Inter Partes Review, Lam Research Corp.
`v. Daniel L. Flamm, IPR2015-01767 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 24, 2016)
`
`M. A. Lieberman and R. A. Gottscho, Design of High-Density Plasma
`Sources for Materials Processing (1994) (“Lieberman”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,573,595 (“Dible”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,065,118 (“Collins”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,683,539 (“Qian”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,688,357 (“Hanawa”)
`
`Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition (1996)
`(Excerpt)
`
`EP Patent Application No. 0421430 A2 (“Mintz”)
`
`Not Used
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,401,350 (“Patrick”)
`
`V. A. Godyak, et al., Electrical Characteristics and Electron Heating
`Mechanism of an Inductively Coupled Argon Discharge, Plasma
`Sources Sci. Technol. Vol 3, pp. 169-176 (1994) (“Godyak”)
`
`Rudolf F. Graf, Dictionary of Modern Electronics, 6th ed. (1984)
`(Excerpt)
`
`1017
`
`R. B. Piejak et al., A simple analysis of an inductive RF discharge,
`
`
`
`vi
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`Exhibit #
`
`Description
`Plasma Sources Sci. Technol. Vol. 1, pp. 179 – 186 (1992)
`(“Piejak”).
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`1025
`
`1026
`
`1027
`
`1028
`
`1029
`
`1030
`
`1031
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review, Lam Research Corp. v. Daniel L.
`Flamm, IPR2015-01767
`
`Not Used
`
`Deposition Transcript of Dr. Flamm, Lam Research Corp. v. Daniel
`L. Flamm, IPR2015-01767
`
`Patent Owner’s Response, Lam Research Corp. v. Daniel L. Flamm,
`IPR2015-01767
`D. Jorgesen and C. Marki, Balun Basics Primer, A Tutorial on
`Baluns, Balun Transformers, Magic-Ts, and 180 Hybrids, Marki
`Microwave, Inc. (2014)
`Balun Transformers, available at
`https://www.minicircuits.com/pages/BalunApplicationNote.htm
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,312,778 (“Collins 778”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,741,799 (“Chen”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,534,816 (“Chen 816”)
`Publisher's Webpage for Plasma Sources for Thin Film Deposition
`and Etching (1994) (1st Edition), available at
`http://store.elsevier.com/product.jsp?isbn=9780125330183&_request
`id=1611063 (last visited Oct. 3, 2016)
`Straw, The ARRL Antenna Book, The American Radio Relay
`League, (1994)
`Sevick, Transmission Line Transformers, The American Radio Relay
`League, 2nd Edition, (1990)
`Declaration of Miloche Kottman (regarding Lieberman), head of
`Cataloging and Archival Processing, University of Kansas
`JP17568591A (“Matsuki”)
`
`
`
`vii
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 and 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-.80, 42.100-.123,
`
`Petitioners Micron
`
`Technology,
`
`Inc.,
`
`Intel
`
`Corporation,
`
`and
`
`GLOBALFOUNDRIES U.S., Inc. (collectively “Petitioners”) hereby request inter
`
`partes review of claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 6,017,221 (Ex.1001, the “221
`
`Patent”) and cancellation of those claims as unpatentable. According to USPTO
`
`records, the 221 Patent is assigned to Daniel L. Flamm.
`
`There is a pending inter partes review trial on claims 1 and 4-7 of the 221
`
`Patent. Lam Research Corp. v. Daniel L. Flamm, IPR2015-01767 (Ex.1005)
`
`(“IPR2015-01767”). For claims 1 and 4-7, this Petition relies on the same prior
`
`art1 in Grounds 1, 2, and 4 as in IPR2015-01767. Petition, 01767 IPR, (Ex.1018).
`
`Notably, this Petition also illustrates that this prior art discloses the claim
`
`limitations even assuming Flamm’s interpretations in IPR2015-01767.
`
`Also for claims 1-7, this Petition relies on a reference that the petition in
`
`IPR2015-01767 does not present. U.S. Patent No. 5,683,539 to Qian et. al.
`
`
`1 This Petition, however, does not present Lieberman 93 and Lieberman 94 as
`
`alternative primary references as in IPR2015-01767. Instead, it relies on
`
`Lieberman 94 because the Lieberman references both include the same substantive
`
`disclosures.
`
`
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`(Ex.1009, “Qian”). Qian sets forth in detail experimental results and specific
`
`measuring equipment, and therefore is not cumulative to the references in
`
`IPR2015-01767.
`
`For claims 2-3, this Petition relies on a secondary reference that IPR2015-
`
`01767 does not raise: U.S. Patent No. 5,688,357 to Hanawa (Ex.1010, “Hanawa”).
`
`Notably, Hanawa explicitly teaches that frequency tuning—using a variable RF
`
`power source—may be used as an alternative to conventional electromechanical
`
`tuning using electric servos and variable capacitors, and further details the
`
`advantages thereof.
`
`II. REQUIREMENTS FOR PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`A. Grounds for Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a))
`The 221 Patent qualifies for IPR, and Petitioners are not barred.2
`
`
`2 Patent Owner did not name Petitioners in an infringement complaint until January
`
`15, 2016, and the court did not issue summonses for purposes of service until
`
`January 21, 2016. N.D. Cal. Case No. 5:15-cv-01277-BLF, Dkts. 50, 58, 60 & 61.
`
`Patent Owner did not serve any Petitioner with the complaint before January 21,
`
`2016.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`B. Notice of Real Party-In-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1))
`The real-parties in interest for this petition are Micron Technology, Inc.,
`
`Intel Corporation, GLOBALFOUNDRIES, Inc., and GLOBALFOUNDRIES U.S.,
`
`Inc. No other parties exercised or could have exercised control over this petition;
`
`no other parties funded or directed this Petition. See Office Patent Trial Practice
`
`Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48759-60.
`
`C. Notice of Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2))
`There is one child application to the 221 Patent, 09/451,633, which issued as
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,127,275.
`
`The 221 Patent is presently at issue in the declaratory judgment action
`
`entitled Lam Research Corp. v. Daniel L. Flamm, Case 5:15-cv-01277-BLF (N.D.
`
`Cal.). The 221 Patent is also at issue in five related patent infringement actions, in
`
`which Flamm sued Petitioners and other defendants, in the Northern District of
`
`California, Case Nos. 5:16-cv-01578-BLF; 5:16-cv-01579-BLF; 5:16-cv-01580-
`
`BLF; 5:16-cv-01581-BLF; 5:16-cv-02252-BLF (“Co-Pending Litigations”).
`
`The 221 Patent is also subject to a pending inter partes review in Lam
`
`Research Corp. v. Daniel L. Flamm, IPR2015-01767 (Ex.1005, “IPR2015-
`
`01767”). There, the Panel instituted review of claims 1 and 4-7. Id. Grounds 1-2
`
`of this Petition, which cover claims 1 and 5-7, rely on the same prior art that was
`
`the basis for the PTAB instituting a trial on claims 1 and 5-7 of the 221 Patent in
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`IPR2015-01767 (but also advance additional arguments in light of Flamm’s claim
`
`interpretations). Ground 4 of this Petition, which covers claim 4, relies on the
`
`same prior art that was the basis for the PTAB instituting a trial on claim 4 of the
`
`221 Patent in IPR2015-01767.
`
`In addition to this Petition, Petitioners are filing petitions for inter partes
`
`review of each asserted patent in the Co-Pending Litigations: Petitions for Inter
`
`Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849, IPR2016-Unassigned (two petitions)
`
`and Petitions for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. RE40,264, IPR2017-
`
`00279, IPR2017-00280, IPR2017-00281, IPR2017-00282.
`
`D. Designation of Lead and Back-up Counsel (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3))
`and Service Information (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4))
`
`Lead Counsel
`Jeremy Jason Lang
`Registration No. 73,604
`(jason.lang@weil.com)
`Attorney for Micron Technology, Inc.
`
`Postal & Hand-Delivery Address:
`Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
`201 Redwood Shores Parkway
`Redwood Shores, CA 94065
`T: 650-802-3237; F: 650-802-3100
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`Jared Bobrow
`Pro hac vice to be submitted
`Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
`201 Redwood Shores Parkway
`Redwood Shores, CA 94065
`650-802-3034 (phone)
`650-802-3100 (fax)
`Attorney for Micron Technology, Inc.
`
`Robert Stephen Magee
`Registration No. 70,227
`(robert.magee@weil.com)
`Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
`201 Redwood Shores Parkway
`Redwood Shores, CA 94065
`T: 650-802-3985; F: 650-802-3100
`Attorney for Micron Technology, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`Lead Counsel
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`Chad Campbell
`Pro hac vice to be submitted
`Perkins Coie LLP
`2901 N. Central Ave, Suite 2000,
`Phoenix, AZ 85012
`602-351-8000 (phone)
`602-648-7000 (fax)
`Attorney for Intel Corporation
` 
`Jonathan McFarland
`Registration No. 61,109
`Perkins Coie LLP
`1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
`Seattle, WA 98101
`206-359-8000 (phone)
`206-359-9000 (fax)
`Attorney for Intel Corporation
`
`Philip A. Morin
`Registration No. 45,926
`Perkins Coie LLP
`11988 El Camino Real, Suite 350
`San Diego, CA 92130
`858-720-5700 (phone)
`858-720-5799 (fax)
`Attorney for Intel Corporation
`
`David M. Tennant
`Registration No. 48,362
`WHITE & CASE LLP
`701 Thirteenth Street, NW
`Washington, DC 20005-3807
`(202) 626-3600 (phone)
`(202) 639-9355 (fax)
`Attorney for GLOBALFOUNDRIES
`U.S., Inc.
`
`Nathan Zhang
`Registration No. 71,401
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`Lead Counsel
`
`
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`WHITE & CASE LLP
`3000 El Camino Real
`5 Palo Alto Square, 9th Floor,
`Palo Alto, CA 94306
`650-213-0300 (phone)
`650-213-8158 (fax)
`Attorney for GLOBALFOUNDRIES
`U.S., Inc.
`
`Payment of Fees (37 C.F.R. § 42.103)
`
`E.
`The Director is authorized to charge the fee specified by 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.15(a), and any other required fees, to Deposit Account No. 506499.
`
`Proof of Service
`
`F.
`Proof of service of this Petition on the Patent Owner at the correspondence
`
`address of record for the 221 Patent is attached.
`
`III.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CLAIMS BEING CHALLENGED
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.22(a)(1) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b) and (b)(1),
`
`Petitioners challenge claims 1-7 of the 221 Patent. Petitioners respectfully request
`
`inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-7 of the 221 Patent based on the
`
`grounds detailed below.
`
`A.
`
`Specific Art and Statutory Grounds on Which the Challenges to
`the Claims are Based
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(2), inter partes review of the 221 Patent is
`
`requested in view of the following references:
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`1. Michael A. Lieberman and Richard A. Gottscho, Design of High-Density
`
`Plasma Sources for Materials Processing (Ex.1006; Ex. 1027, “Lieberman”),
`
`PLASMA SOURCES FOR THIN FILM DEPOSITION AND ETCHING (PHYSICS OF
`
`THIN FILMS VOLUME 18), August 18, 1994. Lieberman is prior art to the 221
`
`Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).3
`
`2. U.S. Patent No. 5,573,595 to Dible (Ex.1007, “Dible”), issued on
`
`November 12, 1996, and filed on September 29, 1995. Dible is prior art to
`
`the 221 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`3. U.S. Patent No. 5,065,118 to Collins et al. (Ex.1008, “Collins”), issued
`
`on November 12, 1991, and thus prior art to the 221 Patent under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`4. U.S. Patent No. 5,683,539 to Qian et al. (Ex.1009, “Qian”), issued on
`
`November 4, 1997 and filed on June 7, 1995. Qian is prior art to the 221
`
`Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`5. U.S. Patent No. 5,688,357 to Hanawa (Ex.1010, “Hanawa”), issued on
`
`November 18, 1997 and filed on February 15, 1995. Hanawa is prior art to
`
`the 221 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`3 Lieberman on its face displays a copyright date of 1994. See also Ex.1030,
`
`(Declaration of M. Kottman); Ex.1027 (“Release Date” of 8/18/1994).
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`None of these references was cited or considered by the PTO during the
`
`prosecution of the 221 Patent.
`
`Petitioners request cancellation of challenged claims 1-7 under the following
`
`statutory grounds:
`
` Ground 1: Claims 1 and 5-7 are rendered obvious by Lieberman under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
`
` Ground 2: Claims 1 and 5-7 are rendered obvious by Lieberman in view of
`
`Dible under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
`
` Ground 3: Claims 2-3 are rendered obvious by Lieberman (Ground 1), or
`
`Lieberman in view of Dible (Ground 2 combination), in view of Hanawa
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
`
` Ground 4: Claim 4 is rendered obvious by Lieberman (Ground 1), or
`
`Lieberman in view of Dible (Ground 2 combination), in view of Collins
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
`
` Ground 5: Claims 1 and 5-7 are rendered obvious by Qian under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
`
` Ground 6: Claims 2-3 are rendered obvious by Qian in view of Hanawa
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
`
` Ground 7: Claim 4 is rendered obvious by Qian in view of Collins under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`The following demonstrates that there is a reasonable likelihood that the
`
`Petitioners will prevail. See 35 U.S.C. § 314(a). Additional explanation and
`
`support for each ground are set forth in the expert declaration of David Graves,
`
`Ph.D. (Ex.1003, “Graves Decl.”).
`
`IV. OVERVIEW OF THE 221 PATENT
`The 221 Patent is a continuation-in-part of a U.S. patent application filed on
`
`October 23, 1996 (now abandoned) (Appl. No. 08/736,315) that claims priority to
`
`another application filed on December 4, 1995 (also abandoned) (Appl. No.
`
`08/567,224).
`
`A. The 221 Patent Disclosure
`The crux of the alleged invention of the 221 Patent is the well-known
`
`process of controlling undesirable capacitive coupling of an inductively-coupled
`
`plasma source for semiconductor processing. See Ex.1003, ¶37.
`
`Inductively-Coupled Plasma Source
`
`1.
`The 221 Patent discusses “plasma processing of devices using an inductive
`
`discharge,” such processing including, for example, “plasma etching and resist
`
`stripping of semiconductor devices. . . . [and] chemical vapor deposition (CVD) of
`
`semiconductor devices.” Ex.1001 at 1:16-21. “These plasma processing
`
`techniques often rely upon radio frequency power (RF) supplied to an inductive
`
`coil for providing power to gas phase species in forming a plasma.” Id., 1:33-36.
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`Capactively Coupled Currents
`
`2.
`The 221 Patent describes how, in an inductively-coupled plasma source
`
`configuration, “capacitive coupling between high voltage selections of the coil and
`
`the plasma discharge often cause high and uncontrollable plasma potentials relative
`
`to ground,” which, in turn, “can cause damaging high energy ion bombardment of
`
`articles being processed by the plasma.” Ex.1001 at 2:66-3:5. “Consequently,
`
`uncontrolled potential differences, such as that caused by ‘stray’ capacitive
`
`coupling from the coil of an inductive plasma source to the plasma, are
`
`undesirable.” Id., 4:37-39.
`
`3.
`
`Phase and Anti-Phase Portions of the Capacitively Coupled
`Currents
`
`The 221 Patent discusses reducing capacitively coupled currents by
`
`selectively adjusting phase and anti-phase portions of an excitation signal. It
`
`states: “[s]ince the capacitive current increases monotonically with the magnitude
`
`of the difference of peak phase and anti-phase voltages, which occur at points A
`
`and C in FIG. 2A, this coupling can be lessened by reducing this voltage
`
`difference.” Ex.1001, 10:31-35.
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`Ex.1001, 221Patent at Fig. 2A.
`
`
`
`Referring to Figure 2A above, the phase and anti-phase components of the
`
`voltage are represented, respectively, at reference numerals 70 and 71. Capacitive
`
`coupling is reduced by setting “substantially zero AC voltage at one point on the
`
`inductive coil (refer to point 00 in FIG. 2A),” which with a sinusoid waveform,
`
`provides “substantially equal phase 70 and anti-phase voltage 71 distributions in
`
`directions about this point (refer to 00-A and 00-C in FIG. 2A) and provides
`
`substantially equal capacitance coupling to the plasma from physical inductor
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`elements (00-C) and (00-A), carrying the phase and anti-phase potentials.” Id.,
`
`10:14-22.
`
`In this embodiment, the 221 Patent notes that “the phase and anti-phase
`
`relationship between the plasma potentials substantially cancel each other.” Id.,
`
`9:60-63, 10:22-28. By making the voltages substantially “cancel” each other,
`
`thereby reducing the magnitude of the difference of peak phase and anti-phase
`
`voltages relative to ground, the 221 Patent teaches that the capacitively coupled
`
`currents are reduced. Id., 10:29-39; see also Ex.1003, ¶¶39-41. In other words, the
`
`phase and anti-phase of the voltages, and corresponding currents, are equally
`
`distributed along the coil. See Id.; see also Ex.1003, ¶¶31-33 (explaining
`
`correspondence between voltages and currents).
`
`In support of the selectively balanced claim element (“in which a phase
`
`portion and an anti-phase portion of capacitive currents … are selectively
`
`balanced”), the 221 Patent describes how “[p]ower transfer can be occurred [sic]
`
`with a balanced feed such as an inductively-coupled push-pull arrangement.”
`
`Ex.1001 at 16:18-45, 22:62-65; see also Ex.1003, ¶41. Effectively, the phase
`
`voltages “push” capacitively coupled current into the plasma while the anti-phase
`
`voltages “pull” capacitively coupled current out of the plasma. Ex.1003, ¶41.
`
`With reference to Figure 4 below, this “push-pull arrangement” can be
`
`accomplished with a “ferrite or powdered iron core ‘balun’ (balanced-unbalanced)
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`toroidal
`
`transformer (i.e., broadband
`
`transmission
`
`transformer, broadband
`
`transformer, etc.) 401 [that] can be used to provide balanced matching.” Ex.1001
`
`at 16:27-30. The push-pull arrangement is characterized by phase (405) and anti-
`
`phase (404) voltages and corresponding currents that are substantially equally
`
`distributed around the midpoint of the coil (406) as well as reduced peak phase and
`
`anti-phase voltages with respect to ground, resulting in reduced capacitively
`
`coupled current. Ex.1001 at 16:18-45; cf. id., 10:29-35; see also Ex.1003, ¶41.
`
`transformer
`
`Ex.1001, 221 Patent, Fig. 4 (annotated).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,221
`
`4. Wave Adjustment Circuit
`The 221 Patent discusses adjusting the phase and anti-phase portions of
`
`capacitively coupled currents using wave adjustment circuits. See, e.g., Ex.1001 at
`
`Claim 1. Referring back to Figure 2A, an “upper wave adjustment circuit 57” and
`
`a “lower wave adjustment circuit 59” are shown connected to the “inductive
`
`applicator 55.” Id., 10:4-6. The wave adjustment circuits are used to achieve the
`
`reduction of capacitively coupled currents: “Since the capacitive current increases
`
`monotonically with the magnitude of the difference of peak phase and anti-phase
`
`voltages, which occur at points A and C in FIG. 2A, this coupling can be lessened
`
`by reducing this voltage difference. In FIG. 2A, for example, it is achieved by way
`
`of two wave adjustment circuits 57, 59.” Id., 10:31-37.
`
`The 221 Patent does not specifically define “wave adjustment circuit,” but
`
`describes several possibilities for the circuit elements that comprise a wave
`
`adjustment circuit (“e.g. inductors, capacitors, transmission line sections, and
`
`others”) (Id., 9:51-53), and describes the role it plays: “A wave adjustment circuit
`
`(e.g., RLC circuit, coil, transmission line, etc.) is operably coupled to the plasma
`
`applicator. The wave adjustment circuit can selectively adjust phase and anti-
`
`phase potentials of the plasma from an rf power supply.” Id., 7:29-34.
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017