`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS COMPANY, LTD.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`DANIEL L. FLAMM
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`__________________________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,711,849
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`Page
`INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1 
`REQUIREMENTS FOR PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW ....... 1 
`2.1. Grounds for Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)) .................................... 1 
`2.2. Notice of Lead and Backup Counsel and Service Information ............ 2 
`2.3. Notice of Real-Parties-in-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)) ................. 3 
`2.4. Notice of Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2)) ............................. 3 
`2.5. Fee for Inter Partes Review ................................................................. 5 
`2.6. Proof of Service .................................................................................... 5 
`IDENTIFICATION OF CLAIMS BEING CHALLENGED (§
`42.104(B)) ....................................................................................................... 5 
`OVERVIEW OF THE 849 PATENT ............................................................. 5 
`849 PATENT PROSECUTION HISTORY ................................................. 13 
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ......................................................................... 15 
`6.1. Applicable Law .................................................................................. 15 
`6.2. Construction of Claim Terms ............................................................. 15 
`6.2.1. “surface reaction rate constant” (all claims) .......................... 16 
`PERSON HAVING ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ............................ 19 
`DESCRIPTION OF THE PRIOR ART ....................................................... 20 
`8.1. Alkire (Ex. 1005) ................................................................................ 20 
`8.2. Kao (Ex. 1006) ................................................................................... 24 
`8.3. Flamm (Ex. 1007)............................................................................... 29 
`8.4. Motivations To Combine: Alkire in Combination with Kao ............ 30 
`8.5. Motivations To Combine: Alkire in Combination with Kao and
`Flamm ................................................................................................. 32 
`GROUND #1: CLAIMS 1-29 OF THE 849 PATENT ARE
`UNPATENTABLE AS OBVIOUS OVER ALKIRE IN VIEW OF
`KAO .............................................................................................................. 34 
`9.1. Claim 1 is obvious over Alkire in view of Kao ................................. 34 
`
`1.
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`5.
`6.
`
`7.
`8.
`
`9.
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`9.1.1. [1.P] “A device fabrication method comprising the steps
`of:” ......................................................................................... 34 
`9.1.2. [1.1] “providing a plasma etching apparatus comprising
`a substrate therein, said substrate comprising a top
`surface and a film overlying said top surface, said film
`comprising a top film surface;” ............................................. 35 
`9.1.3. [1.2] “etching said top film surface to define a relatively
`non-uniform etching profile on said film, and defining
`etch rate data comprising an etch rate and a spatial
`coordinate which defines a position within said
`relatively non-uniform etching profile on said substrate,
`said etching comprising a reaction between a gas phase
`etchant and said film; and” .................................................... 37 
`9.1.4. [1.3] “extracting a surface reaction rate constant from
`said etch rate data, and using said surface reaction rate
`constant in the fabrication of a device.” ................................ 41 
`9.2. Claim 10 is obvious over Alkire in view of Kao ............................... 46 
`9.2.1. [10.P] “A method of designing a reactor comprising the
`steps of:” ................................................................................ 46 
`9.2.2. [10.1] “providing a first plasma etching apparatus
`comprising a substrate therein, said substrate
`comprising a top surface and a film overlying said top
`surface, said film comprising a top film surface” .................. 47 
`9.2.3. [10.2] “etching said top film surface to define a
`relatively non-uniform etching profile on said film, and
`defining etch rate data comprising an etch rate and a
`spatial coordinate which defines a position within said
`relatively non-uniform etching profile on said film of
`said substrate, said etching comprising a reaction
`between a gas phase etchant and said film; and” ................... 47 
`9.2.4. [10.3] “extracting a surface reaction rate constant from
`said etch rate data, and using said surface reaction rate
`constant in designing a second plasma etching
`apparatus.”.............................................................................. 48 
`9.3. Claim 20 is obvious over Alkire in view of Kao ............................... 49 
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`9.3.1. [20.p] “A substrate fabrication method, using a plasma
`etching apparatus, said method comprising:” ........................ 49 
`9.3.2. [20.1] “providing a substrate selected from a group
`consisting of a semiconductor wafer, a plate, and a flat
`panel display, said substrate comprising a top surface;” ....... 49 
`9.3.3. [20.2] “forming a film overlying said top surface, said
`film comprising a top film surface;” ...................................... 50 
`9.3.4. [20.3] “etching said top film surface to define a
`relatively non-uniform profile on said film, and defining
`etch rate data comprising an etch rate and a spatial
`coordinate which defines a position within said
`relatively non-uniform etching profile of said film on
`said substrate, said etching comprising a reaction
`between a gas phase etchant and said film; and” ................... 50 
`9.3.5. [20.4] “extracting a surface reaction rate constant from
`said etch rate data, and using said surface reaction rate
`constant.” ................................................................................ 51 
`9.4. Claim 22 is obvious over Alkire in view of Kao ............................... 51 
`9.4.1. [22.P] “A method of fabricating an integrated circuit
`device, using a plasma etching apparatus, said method
`comprising:” ........................................................................... 51 
`9.4.2. [22.1] “providing a uniformity value and a surface
`reaction rate constant for an etching reaction, said
`etching reaction including a substrate and etchant
`species;” ................................................................................. 52 
`9.4.3. [22.2]“defining etching parameters providing said uniformity value; and”
`9.4.4. [22.3] “adjusting at least one of said etching parameters
`using said surface reaction rate constant to produce a
`selected etching rate” ............................................................. 55 
`9.4.5. [22.4] “wherein said etching rate providing an etching
`condition for fabrication of an integrated circuit
`device.” .................................................................................. 57 
`9.5. Claim 26 is obvious over Alkire in view of Kao ............................... 58 
`9.5.1. [26.P] “A process for fabricating a device using a
`plasma etching apparatus, said device being fabricated
`
`iii
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`by use of a surface reaction rate constant, said surface
`reaction rate constant being derived from a method
`comprising:” ........................................................................... 58 
`9.5.2. [26.1] “providing a plasma etching apparatus
`comprising a substrate therein, said substrate
`comprising a top surface and a film overlying said top
`surface, said film comprising a top film surface” .................. 58 
`9.5.3. [26.2] “etching said top surface at a temperature to
`define a relatively non-uniform etching profile on said
`film, and defining etch rate data comprising an etch rate
`and a spatial coordinate which defined a position from
`said relatively non-uniform etching profile on said film
`of said substrate, said etching comprising a reaction
`between a gas phase etchant and said film; and” ................... 59 
`9.5.4. [26.3] “extracting from said etching rate data a surface
`reaction rate constant for said temperature.” ......................... 59 
`9.6. Dependent Claims 2 and 11 are obvious over Alkire in view of
`Kao ..................................................................................................... 60 
`9.6.1. [2.0] “The method of claim 1 wherein said etching step
`is diffusion limited.” .............................................................. 60 
`[11.0] “The method of claim 10 wherein said etching step
`at a postion [sic] on said relatively non-uniform etching
`profile is diffusion limited.” ..................................................... 60 
`9.7. Dependent Claims 3 and 12 are obvious over Alkire in view of
`Kao ..................................................................................................... 60 
`9.7.1. [3.0] “The method of claim 1 wherein said spatial
`coordinate includes a radius and an angle.” ........................... 61 
`[12.0] “The method of claim 10 wherein said spatial
`coordinate which defines said position along said
`relatively non-uniform etching profile includes a radius
`and an angle.” ........................................................................... 61 
`9.8. Dependent Claims 4 and 13 are obvious over Alkire in view of
`Kao ..................................................................................................... 63 
`9.8.1. [4.0] “The method of claim 1 wherein said spatial
`coordinate includes an x-direction and a y-direction.” .......... 63 
`
`iv
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`[13.0] “The method of claim 10 wherein said spatial
`coordinate which defines said position within said
`relatively non-uniform etching profile includes an x-
`direction and a y-direction.” .................................................... 63 
`9.9. Dependent Claims 5 and 14 are obvious over Alkire in view of
`Kao ..................................................................................................... 64 
`9.9.1. [5.0] “The method of claim 1 wherein said extracting
`step correlates said surface reaction rate constant over a
`diffusivity with said etch rate, said etch rate being
`defined by said relatively non-uniform etching profile.” ...... 64 
`[14.0] “The method of claim 8 wherein said extracting
`step correlates said surface reaction rate constant over a
`diffusivity with said etch rate, said etch rate being
`defined by said relatively non-uniform etching profile.” ........ 64 
`9.10. Dependent Claims 6 and 15 are obvious over Alkire in view of
`Kao ..................................................................................................... 65 
`9.10.1. [6.0] “The method of claim 1 wherein said etch rate is
`defined by said relatively non-uniform etching profile at
`selected spatial coordinates over a time.” .............................. 65 
`[15.0] “The method of claim 10 wherein said etch rate is
`defined by said relatively non-uniform etching profile at
`selected spatial coordinates over a time.” ................................ 65 
`9.11. Dependent Claims 7 and 16 are obvious over Alkire in view of
`Kao ..................................................................................................... 66 
`9.11.1. [7.0] “The method of claim 1 wherein said etching is an
`ashing method.” ..................................................................... 66 
`[16.0] “The method of claim 10 wherein said etching is
`an ashing method.” ................................................................... 66 
`9.12. Dependent Claims 8 and 17 are obvious over Alkire in view of
`Kao ..................................................................................................... 67 
`9.12.1. [8.0] “The method of claim 7 wherein said ashing
`method comprises reactants including an oxygen and a
`photoresist.” ........................................................................... 67 
`
`v
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`[17.0] “The method of claim 16 wherein said ashing
`method comprises reactants including an oxygen and a
`photoresist.” ............................................................................. 67 
`9.13. Claim 9 is obvious over Alkire in view of Kao ................................. 68 
`9.13.1. [9.0] “The method of claim 1 further comprising a step
`of using said reaction rate constant in adjusting said
`plasma etch apparatus.” ......................................................... 68 
`9.14. Claim 18 is obvious over Alkire in view of Kao ............................... 69 
`9.14.1. [18.0] “The method of claim 10 wherein said second
`plasma etching apparatus is a co-axial reactor.” .................... 69 
`9.15. Claim 19 is obvious over Alkire in view of Kao ............................... 70 
`9.15.1. [19.0] “The method of claim 10 wherein said second
`plasma etching apparatus is a plasma etching
`apparatus.”.............................................................................. 70 
`9.16. Dependent Claims 21 and 28 are obvious over Alkire in view of
`Kao ..................................................................................................... 70 
`9.16.1. [21.0] “The method of claims 1, 10, or 20 wherein said
`etching is provided whereupon chemical effects are
`enhanced over ion bombardment effects.” ............................ 71 
`[28.0] “The process of claim 26 wherein said etching is
`provided whereupon chemical effects are enhanced over
`ion bombardment effects.” ....................................................... 71 
`9.17. Claim 23 is obvious over Alkire in view of Kao ............................... 72 
`9.17.1. [23.0] “The method of claim 22 wherein said etching
`parameters can be selected from a group consisting of a
`temperature, a pressure, a power, a gap, and a flow
`rate.” ....................................................................................... 72 
`9.18. Dependent Claims 24 and 25 are obvious over Alkire in view of
`Kao ..................................................................................................... 73 
`9.18.1. [24.0] “The method of claim 22 wherein said uniformity
`value ranges from 90% and greater.”..................................... 73 
`[25.0] “The method of claim 22 wherein said uniformity
`value ranges from 95% and greater.” ....................................... 73 
`9.19. Claim 27 is obvious over Alkire in view of Kao ............................... 73 
`
`vi
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`9.19.1. [27.0] “The process of claim 26 wherein said surface
`reaction rate constant is derived using at least a
`diffusivity value that is determined by an equation.” ............ 74 
`9.20. Claim 29 is obvious over Alkire in view of Kao ............................... 74 
`9.20.1. [29.0] “The method of claim 26 further comprising
`using said surface reaction rate constant in a method
`selected from a group consisting of a fabrication of a
`device or of designing a reactor, said surface reaction
`rate constant being provided by at least a diffusivity
`value.” .................................................................................... 74 
`10. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 75 
`
`
`
`vii
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`Exhibit List
`
`Exhibit #
`
`Description
`
`Ex.1001 U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849 (“849 Patent”)
`
`Ex.1002
`
`File History for U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`Ex.1003 Declaration of Dr. David Graves (“Graves Decl.”)
`
`Ex.1004 Curriculum Vitae of Dr. David Graves
`
`Ex.1005 Alkire et al., “Transient Behavior during Film Removal in Diffusion-
`Controlled Plasma Etching,” J. Electrochem. Soc.: Solid-State Science
`and Technology, March 1985, pp. 648-656 (“Alkire”)
`
`Ex.1006 Kao et al., “Analysis of Nonuniformities in the Plasma Etching of
`Silicon with CF4/O2,” J. Electrochem. Soc., Vol. 137 No. 3, March
`1990, pp. 954-960 (“Kao”)
`
`Ex.1007
`
`Flamm et al., “The Reaction of Fluorine Atoms With Silicon,” Journal
`of Applied Physics, Vol. 52 No. 5, May 1981, pp. 3633-3639
`(“Flamm”)
`
`Ex.1008 K. F.Jensen, “Chemical Engineering in the Processing of Electronic
`and Optical Materials: A Discussion,” Adv. Chem. Eng., 16(9): 395-
`412 (1991).
`
`Ex.1009 K. F.Jensen and D. B. Graves, “Modeling and Analysis of Low
`Pressure CVD Reactors,” J. Electrochem. Soc., 130(9): 1950-1957
`(1983).
`
`Ex.1010 D. W.Hess and K. F.Jensen, eds., Microelectronics Processing, 221(7-
`8): 362, 377-440 (May 5, 1989).
`
`viii
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`Exhibit #
`
`Description
`
`Ex.1011 K. F. Jensen, “Micro-Reaction Engineering: Applications of Reaction
`Engineering to Processing of Electronic and Photonic Materials,”
`Chem. Eng. Sci., 42(5): 923-958 (1987).
`
`Ex.1012 U.S. Patent No. 4,918,031 (“Flamm 031”)
`
`Ex.1013 U.S. Patent No. 5,304,282 (“Flamm 282”)
`
`Ex.1014 U.S. Patent No. 4,815,201 (“Harris 201”)
`
`Ex.1015 U.S. Patent No. 5,453,157 (“Jeng 157”)
`
`Ex.1016 Declaration of Mariellen F. Calter (“Calter Decl.”)
`
`Ex.1017 Dennis M. Manos and Daniel L. Flamm, Plasma Etching: An
`Introduction, Academic Press, 1989.
`
`Ex.1018
`
`Steinfeld et al., Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics, Prentice Hall, Inc.,
`1989.
`
`Ex.1019
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review, Lam Research Corp. v. Daniel L.
`Flamm, IPR2016-00466.
`
`Ex.1020
`
`S.M. Sze, VLSI Technology, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1983.
`
`Ex.1021 George B. Thomas, Jr., Calculus and Analytic Geometry, 4th Ed.,
`Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1968.
`
`Ex. 1022 RESERVED
`
`ix
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`Exhibit #
`
`Ex. 1023 RESERVED
`
`Description
`
`Ex. 1024 Comparison between the Current Petition and Petition in IPR2017-
`00392
`
`x
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`1.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 and 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.1-.80, 42.100-.123,
`
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (“Petitioner”) hereby petitions the Patent Trial and
`
`Appeal Board to institute an inter partes review of claims 1-29 of U.S. Patent No.
`
`5,711,849, titled “Process Optimization In Gas Phase Dry Etching” (Ex.1001, the
`
`“849 Patent”), and cancel those claims as unpatentable.
`
`This Petition is being submitted concurrently with a Motion for Joinder.
`
`Specifically, Petitioner requests institution and joinder with Micron Technology,
`
`Inc. et al v. Daniel L. Flamm, IPR2017-00392 (“the Micron IPR” or “the Micron
`
`proceeding”), which the Board instituted on June 9, 2017. This Petition is
`
`substantially identical to the Petition in the Micron IPR; it contains the same
`
`grounds (based on the same prior art combinations and supporting evidence)
`
`against the same claims. (See Ex. 1024, illustrating changes between the instant
`
`Petition and the Petition in IPR2017-00392.)
`
`2.
`
`REQUIREMENTS FOR PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`2.1. Grounds for Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a))
`The ’849 Patent is available for inter partes review and Petitioner is not
`
`barred or estopped from requesting an inter partes review challenging the Patent
`
`claims on the grounds identified in this Petition. Petitioner is not estopped because
`
`this Petition is accompanied by a Motion for Joinder, and is being submitted no
`
`later than one month after the institution date of the Micron IPR. Under the
`
`1
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`Board’s current interpretation of the statute and rules, including 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.122(b), the time period set forth in § 42.101(b) does not apply to a Petition
`
`accompanied by a request for joinder.
`
`2.2. Notice of Lead and Backup Counsel and Service Information
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.8(b)(3), 42.8(b)(4), and 42.10(a), Petitioner
`
`provides the following designation of Lead and Back-Up counsel.
`
`Lead Counsel
`Naveen Modi (Reg. No.  
`46,224)
`Paul Hastings LLP,
`875 15th St. N.W.
`Washington, DC, 20005
`Telephone: 202.551.1990
`Fax: 202.551.1705
`Email: PH-Samsung-Flamm-
`IPR@paulhastings.com
`
`
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`Joseph E. Palys (Reg. No. 46,508)
`Paul Hastings LLP,
`875 15th St. N.W.
`Washington, DC, 20005
`Telephone: 202.551.1996
`Fax: 202.551.1705
`Email: PH-Samsung-Flamm-
`IPR@paulhastings.com
`
`Chetan R. Bansal (Limited Recognition
`No. L0667)
`Paul Hastings LLP,
`875 15th St. N.W.
`Washington, DC, 20005
`Telephone: 202.551.1948
`Fax: 202.551.1705
`Email: PH-Samsung-Flamm-
`IPR@paulhastings.com
`
`Howard Herr
`(pro hac vice admission to be requested)
`Paul Hastings LLP,
`875 15th St. N.W.
`Washington, DC, 20005
`Telephone: 202.551.1980
`Fax: 202.551.1705
`Email: PH-Samsung-Flamm-
`
`2
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`Lead Counsel
`
`Back-Up Counsel
`IPR@paulhastings.com
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b), Powers of Attorney for Petitioner are
`
`attached.
`
`2.3. Notice of Real-Parties-in-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1))
`The real-parties-in-interest for this petition are Samsung Electronics Co.,
`
`Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., and
`
`Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC. 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.
`
`2.4. Notice of Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2))
`Daniel L. Flamm (“Flamm”) has asserted the 849 Patent and U.S. Patent
`
`Nos. 6,017,221 (the “’221 Patent”) and RE40,264 (the “RE264 Patent”)
`
`(collectively, “the asserted patents”) in the following co-pending litigations (now
`
`stayed): Daniel L. Flamm, Sc.D. v. Micron Technology, Inc., 16-cv-1581 (N.D.
`
`Cal.), Daniel L. Flamm v. GLOBALFOUNDRIES U.S. Inc., 16-cv-1578 (N.D.
`
`Cal.), Daniel L. Flamm v. Intel Corporation, 16-cv-1579 (N.D. Cal.), Daniel L.
`
`Flamm v. Maxim Integrated Products, Inc., 16-cv-1580 (N.D. Cal.), and Daniel L.
`
`3
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`Flamm v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 16-cv-02252 (N.D. Cal.)1. The 849
`
`Patent is also at issue in a declaratory judgment action entitled Lam Research
`
`Corp. v. Daniel L. Flamm, 15-cv-1277 (N.D. Cal.).
`
`The 849 Patent was at issue in Lam Research Corp. v. Daniel L. Flamm,
`
`IPR2016-00466. The 849 Patent is presently at issue in two inter partes review
`
`proceedings, Micron Technology, Inc. et al v. Daniel L. Flamm, IPR2017-00392
`
`and IPR2017-00406, both instituted on June 9, 2017. In addition to this Petition,
`
`Petitioner is filing six petitions for inter partes review: an additional Petition for
`
`inter partes review of 849 Patent, four Petitions for inter partes review of the
`
`RE264 Patent, and a Petition for inter partes review of the 221 Patent.
`
`Concurrently with each of these six Petitions, Petitioner is filing Motions for
`
`Joinder to join inter partes reviews of the 849 Patent (IPR2017-00406), the RE264
`
`Patent (IPR2017-00279, IPR2017-00280, IPR2017-00281, and IPR2017-00282),
`
`and the 221 Patent (IPR2017-00391).
`
`
`
`
`1 Patent Owner had asserted the ’221 Patent against Petitioner in Daniel L. Flamm
`
`v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al., No. 1:15-cv-613-LY (WDTX). The case
`
`was transferred to the Northern District of California on April 27, 2016 and is now
`
`pending under Case No. 5:16-cv-2252-BLF (NDCA)
`
`4
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,980,766, which expired due to non-payment of fees,
`
`claimed priority to the 849 Patent.
`
`2.5. Fee for Inter Partes Review
`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. 50-2613.
`
`2.6. Proof of Service
`Proof of service of this petition on the patent owner at the correspondence
`
`address of record for the 849 Patent is attached.
`
`3.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CLAIMS BEING CHALLENGED (§
`42.104(B))
`Ground #1: Claims 1-29 of the 849 Patent are invalid under (pre-AIA) 35
`
`U.S.C. § 103 on the ground that they are obvious over Alkire in view of Kao. This
`
`ground is explained below and is supported by the Declaration of Dr. David
`
`Graves (Ex.1003, “Graves Decl.”)
`
`4. OVERVIEW OF THE 849 PATENT
`The 849 Patent was filed on May 3, 1995 and issued on January 27, 1998.
`
`The 849 Patent does not claim priority to any other applications or patents.
`
`The 849 Patent relates generally to modeling gaseous diffusion and surface
`
`chemical reaction to predict etch rate uniformity in a plasma reactor in connection
`
`with designing a reactor for the manufacture of integrated circuits. Ex.1001, 849
`
`Patent at Abstract, 1:6-7; Ex.1003, ¶45. The alleged invention is a method for
`
`5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`applied chemical reaction engineering, modeling the “reaction between a neutral
`
`gas phase species and a surface material layer, typically for removal,” Ex.1001 at
`
`1:20-21, and is “illustrated in an example with regard to plasma etching.” Id. at
`
`1:6-7.
`
`The 849 Patent alleges that the “conventional technique for obtaining and
`
`maintaining uniform etching relies upon a ‘trial and error’ process.” Id. at 1:28-30.
`
`It also alleges that “reaction rates between the etching species and the etched
`
`material are often not available,” and so “it is often impossible to anticipate actual
`
`etch rates from reaction rate constants.” Id. at 1:36-39. Thus, to avoid the need to
`
`build “[f]ull scale prototype equipment,” the 849 Patent describes a method of
`
`“determining a reaction rate coefficient based upon etch profile data” to “provide[]
`
`for an easy and cost effective way to select appropriate etching parameters such as
`
`reactor dimensions, temperature, pressure, radio frequency (rf) power, flow rate
`
`and the like.” Id. at 1:42-57.
`
`The 849 Patent uses two exemplary plasma etching apparatuses in
`
`describing its claimed methods. See id. at Figs. 1, 2. Figure 1 is a simplified
`
`diagram of a co-axial reactor, divided into three processing zones: a plasma
`
`generating zone 13, a transport zone 15, and a plate stack zone 17. Id. at 2:56-62.
`
`6
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`Ex.1001, 849 Patent at Fig. 1.
`
`
`
`The “gas phase species” enter into the plasma generating zone through the
`
`chemical feed (“F” above), diffuse through the transport zone, and are consumed
`
`by a chemical reaction as they diffuse “over surfaces of the substrates [21].” Id. at
`
`2:63-3:25. An exhaust is provided at E in Figure 1 for the removal of remaining
`
`gas phase species. Id. This type of reactor “relies substantially upon diffusion to
`
`obtain the desired etching uniformity” and “a chemical etch rate which is diffusion
`
`limited.” Id. at 3:6-9.
`
`Figure 2 illustrates “an alternative example” of a reactor that can be used in
`
`the claimed methods. Id. at 4:14-15.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`Ex.1001, 849 Patent at Fig. 2.
`
`
`
`In Figure 2, the reactor is a “single wafer etching apparatus” with two
`
`electrodes (55 and 57) which contain the plasma in region 54. Id. at Fig. 2, 4:16-
`
`22. Again, the gas phase species are introduced through the chemical feed (F), and
`
`are removed through an exhaust (E). Id. at 4:27-28. The substrate (61) sits on a
`
`platen (64) and the gas phase species are directed to the substrate by diffusion. Id.
`
`at 4:18-31.
`
`Although the specification provides two exemplary reactors, “the invention
`
`may be applied to other reactors such as large batch, high pressure, chemical,
`
`single wafer, and others.” Id. at 4:61-63. As the 849 Patent admits, “[o]ne of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would easily recognize other applications” of the modeling
`
`methods claimed. Id. at 5:5-7.
`
`8
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`The 849 Patent models the behavior of substrate film removal in diffusion-
`
`limited plasma etching. The model for the surface etching reaction “bears a first
`
`order form:
`
`O+S→SO
`
`where S is a substrate atom . . . and O is the gas-phase etchant.” Id. at 3:34-47.
`
`The rate of this reaction is directly related to the concentration of the gas-phase
`
`etchant, and can produce a non-uniform etching profile as a result of “different
`
`etch rates along the r-direction of the substrate corresponding to different etchant
`
`species concentrations.” Id. at 4:2-6.
`
`Figure 1A illustrates the concentration of the etchant as a function of the
`
`substrate radius in the top graph, and illustrates the convex etching profile of the
`
`substrate film (27). Id. at 3:66-4:9. The etching profile “can be measured by
`
`conventional techniques” and can be used to derive an “etching rate constant.” Id.
`
`at 4:47-49.
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`Ex.1001, 849 Patent at Fig. 1A.
`
`The etching rate constant is also described in the 849 Patent as the surface
`
`reaction rate constant, ks. See id. at 7:15-21, 10:33-38. The etch rate (ROS) is equal
`
`to this surface reaction rate constant multiplied by the concentration of the etchant
`
`species (no): ROS = (no) ks. See id.
`
`The 849 Patent includes a method to extract ks by which one: (1) derives an
`
`“etch constant (or a reaction rate constant) over diffusivity (kvo/D)”, (2) multiplies
`
`that value by an estimated diffusivity (DAB) to derive a volumetric reaction rate
`
`constant (kvo), and (3) multiplies the volumetric reaction rate constant by the gap
`
`above the substrate, generally the gap between two substrates, (dgap) to determine a
`
`surface reaction rate constant (ks). Id. at 5:62-6:62, Fig. 3.
`
`The first step of the disclosed method calculates kvo/D, the volumetric etch
`
`constant divided by diffusivity. Id. “kvo is the volume equivalent surface reaction
`
`rate constant.” Id. at 12:8-9. The specification provides two mathematical models
`
`for calculating kvo/D, id. at 6:5-29, but it also provides “a more robust procedure:
`
`determin[ing] kvo/D from a least squares fit to the entire experimental etch profile
`
`data set taken by a conventional stylus profilometer.” Id. at 15:57-59.
`
`The second step multiplies the determined kvo/D by an estimated diffusivity,
`
`DAB. Id. at 6:30-55. The specification provides the “Chapman-Enskog kinetic
`
`theory equation” to estimate the diffusivity, id. at 6:30-46, but does not limit its
`
`10
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`claims to the use of this equation. It states that “[o]f course, other techniques for
`
`calculating a diffusivity may also be used.” Id. at 6:50-52.
`
`The final step calculates the surface reaction rate constant, ks. Id. The
`
`surface reaction rate constant may be determined by:
`
`ks = (kvo) dgap
`
`where dgap is a geometric conversion from a volumetric reaction rate constant to a
`
`surface reaction rate constant. Ex.1003, ¶61.
`
`The etch rate (ROS) is equal to this surface reaction rate constant multiplied
`
`by the concentration of the etchant species (no):
`
`ROS = (no) ks
`
`See Ex.1001 at 7:15-21, 10:33-38. “From the concentration and the surface
`
`reaction rate, the particular etching step can be improved by way of adjusting
`
`selected etching parameters.” Id. at 7:22-24.
`
`The 849 Patent provides a graph of an array of etching parameters
`
`(temperature, pressure, and the distance between substrates) for different calculated
`
`etch uniformities in Figure 5A.
`
`11
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 5,711,849
`
`Ex.1001, 849 Patent at Fig. 5A.
`
`
`
`In Figure 5A, the squares contain a gray scale corresponding to “a different
`
`uniformity value.” Id. at 9:38-41. Based upon this array, it is possible to “compute
`
`locus of highest T, versus P and dgap” that falls within the desired uniformity
`
`specified. Id. at 9:44