UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`DEMARAY LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`____________________
`
`Patent No. 7,544,276
`____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. VIVEK SUBRAMANIAN
`IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,544,276
`
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Demaray LLC
`Samsung Electronic's Exhibit 1002
`Exhibit 1002, Page 1
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`V.
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
`BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS ................................................ 2
`II.
`III. MATERIALS REVIEWED ........................................................................... 5
`IV. PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART AND THE TIME OF
`THE ALLEGED INVENTION ...................................................................... 9
`TECHNICAL BACKGROUND .................................................................. 10
`A.
`Sputter Deposition .............................................................................. 10
`B.
`Reactive Sputter Deposition ............................................................... 13
`C.
`Power Supplies Used for Reactive Sputtering ................................... 14
`D.
`Filter(s) ............................................................................................... 18
`VI. THE ’276 PATENT ...................................................................................... 28
`A. Description ......................................................................................... 28
`VII. OVERVIEW OF THE PRIOR ART ............................................................ 30
`A.
`Barber ................................................................................................. 30
`B.
`Hirose ................................................................................................. 37
`VIII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ......................................................................... 44
`IX. THE PRIOR ART DISCLOSES OR SUGGESTS ALL RECITED
`FEATURES OF CLAIMS 1-13 OF THE ’276 PATENT ............................ 45
`A.
`Barber in view of Hirose Discloses and/or Suggests the
`Limitations of Claims 1-3 and 6-8 ..................................................... 45
`1.
`Claim 1 ..................................................................................... 45
`a)
`Claim 1[a] “A reactor according to the present
`invention, comprising:” ................................................. 45
`Claim 1[b] “a target area for receiving a target;” ......... 48
`Claim 1[c] “a substrate area opposite the target area
`for receiving a substrate;” .............................................. 50
`
`b)
`c)
`
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 2
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`d)
`
`
`
`Claim 1[d] “a pulsed DC power supply coupled to
`the target area, the pulsed DC power supply
`providing alternating negative and positive voltages
`to the target;” ................................................................. 53
`Claim 1[e] “an RF bias power supply coupled to the
`substrate; and” ............................................................... 64
`Claim 1[f] “a narrow band-rejection filter that
`rejects at a frequency of the RE [RF] bias power
`supply coupled between the pulsed DC power
`supply and the target area.” ........................................... 65
`Claim 2 ..................................................................................... 93
`a)
`“The reactor of claim 1, wherein the target has a
`surface area greater than the surface area of the
`substrate.” ...................................................................... 93
`Claim 3 ..................................................................................... 95
`a)
`“The reactor of claim 1, further including a magnet
`which provides erosion of the target.” ........................... 95
`Claim 6 ..................................................................................... 96
`a)
`Claim 6[a] “A reactor according to the present
`invention, comprising:” ................................................. 96
`Claim 6[b] “a target area for receiving a target;” .......... 96
`Claim 6[c] “a magnetic field generator supplying a
`magnetic field to the target;” ......................................... 96
`Claim 6[d] “a substrate area opposite the target area
`for receiving a substrate;” .............................................. 97
`Claim 6[e] “a pulsed DC power supply coupled to
`the target to provide alternating positive and
`negative voltages to the target;” .................................... 97
`Claim 6[f] “an RF bias power supply coupled to
`provide an RF bias to the substrate; and” ...................... 98
`
`e)
`
`f)
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`b)
`c)
`
`d)
`
`e)
`
`f)
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 3
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`g)
`
`
`
`Claim 6[g] “a narrow band rejection filter operating
`at a frequency of the RF bias power supply coupled
`between the pulsed DC power supply and the
`target,” ........................................................................... 99
`Claim 6[h] “wherein a material is deposited on the
`substrate by exposure of the substrate to a plasma
`generated when pulsed DC power from the pulsed
`DC power supply is applied to the target in the
`presence of a process gas.” .......................................... 100
`Claim 7 ................................................................................... 102
`a)
`“The reactor of claim 6, wherein the target is a
`metallic target.” ............................................................ 102
`Claim 8 ................................................................................... 102
`a)
`“The reactor of claim 6, wherein the process gas
`includes one or more of a set consisting of Ar, O2,
`N2, NH3, CO, NO, CO2, C2F6, and halide containing
`gasses.” ........................................................................ 102
`Barber in view of Hirose and Aokura Discloses and/or Suggests
`the Limitations of Claims 4 and 5 .................................................... 103
`1.
`Claims 4 and 5 ........................................................................ 103
`a)
`[4] “The reactor of claim 3, wherein the magnet
`scans across the target in a first direction and
`extends in a second direction perpendicular to the
`first direction.” ............................................................. 103
`[5] “The reactor of claim 4, wherein the magnet
`extends beyond the target in the second direction.” .... 103
`Barber in view of Hirose and Yamazaki Discloses and/or
`Suggests the Limitations of Claim 9 ................................................ 110
`1.
`Claim 9 ................................................................................... 110
`a)
`“The reactor of claim 6, wherein the target is a
`ceramic target.” ............................................................ 110
`
`h)
`
`b)
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 4
`
`

`

`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`
`
`Barber in view of Hirose and Dogheche Discloses Claims 9 and
`10 ...................................................................................................... 113
`1.
`Claim 9 ................................................................................... 113
`a)
`“The reactor of claim 6, wherein the target is a
`ceramic target.” ............................................................ 113
`Claim 10 ................................................................................. 117
`a)
`“The reactor of claim 6, further including a
`temperature controller for holding the temperature
`of the substrate substantially constant.” ...................... 117
`Barber in view of Hirose and Sproul Discloses and/or Suggests
`the Limitations of Claims 11 and 12 ................................................ 121
`1.
`Claims 11 and 12.................................................................... 121
`a)
`[11] “The reactor of claim 6, wherein the target is
`an alloyed target.” ........................................................ 121
`[12] “The reactor of claim 11 wherein the alloyed
`target includes one or more rare-earth ions.” .............. 121
`Barber in view of Hirose and Laird Discloses and/or Suggests
`the Limitations of Claims 11 and 13 ................................................ 125
`1.
`Claim 11 ................................................................................. 125
`a)
`“The reactor of claim 6, wherein the target is an
`alloyed target.” ............................................................. 125
`Claim 13 ................................................................................. 128
`a)
`“The reactor of claim 11 wherein the alloyed target
`includes one or more elements taken from a set
`consisting of Si, Al, Er, Yb, Zn, Ga, Ge, P, As, Sn,
`Sb, Pb, Ag, Au, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb,
`Dy Ho, Tm, and Lu.” ................................................... 128
`Barber in view of Hirose and Segal Discloses and/or Suggests
`the Limitations of Claims 11-13....................................................... 128
`1.
`Claims 11-13 .......................................................................... 128
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`G.
`
`2.
`
`2.
`
`b)
`
`
`
`
`
`iv
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 5
`
`

`

`b)
`
`c)
`
`H.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`[11] “The reactor of claim 6, wherein the target is
`an alloyed target.” ........................................................ 128
`[12] “The reactor of claim 11 wherein the alloyed
`target includes one or more rare-earth ions.” .............. 128
`[13] “The reactor of claim 11 wherein the alloyed
`target includes one or more elements taken from a
`set consisting of Si, Al, Er, Yb, Zn, Ga, Ge, P, As,
`Sn, Sb, Pb, Ag, Au, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd,
`Tb, Dy Ho, Tm, and Lu.” ............................................ 128
`Each of the Above Prior Art Combinations in view of Belkind
`Discloses and/or Suggests the Claims of the ’276 Patent ................ 134
`1.
`Barber in view of Hirose and Belkind Discloses and/or
`Suggests Limitations of Claims 1-3 and 6-8 .......................... 142
`Barber in view of Hirose, Belkind, and Aokura Discloses
`and/or Suggests Limitations of Claims 4 and 5 ..................... 142
`Barber in view of Hirose, Belkind, and Yamazaki
`Discloses and/or Suggests Limitations of Claim 9 ................ 143
`Barber in view of Hirose, Belkind, and Dogheche
`Discloses and/or Suggests Limitations of Claims 9 and 10
` ................................................................................................ 143
`Barber in view of Hirose, Belkind, and Sproul Discloses
`and/or Suggests Limitations of Claims 11 and 12 ................. 144
`Barber in view of Hirose, Belkind, and Laird Discloses
`and/or Suggests Limitations of Claims 11 and 13 ................. 144
`Barber in view of Hirose, Belkind, and Segal Discloses
`and/or Suggests Limitations of Claims 11-13 ....................... 145
`CONCLUSION ........................................................................................... 145
`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`a)
`
`
`
`X.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 6
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`
`I, Vivek Subramanian, declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`I have been retained as an independent expert consultant in this
`1.
`
`proceeding before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) regarding
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276 (“the ’276 patent”) (Ex. 1001).1 I have been asked to
`
`consider whether prior art references disclose or suggest the features recited in
`
`claims 1-13 (“the challenged claims”) of the ’276 patent. My opinions are set forth
`
`below.
`
`2.
`
`I am being compensated at a rate of $650/hour for my work in this
`
`proceeding. My compensation is in no way contingent on the nature of my findings,
`
`the presentation of my findings in testimony, or the outcome of this or any other
`
`proceeding. I have no other interest in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` In this Declaration, I refer to exhibits that I understand are to be attached to the
`
` 1
`
`petition for Inter Partes Review of the ’276 patent.
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 7
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`II. BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`3. My qualifications are stated more fully in my curriculum vitae, which
`
`is attached as Ex. 1003. Below is a summary of my education, work experience, and
`
`other qualifications.
`
`4.
`
`I received a bachelor’s degree summa cum laude in electrical
`
`engineering from Louisiana State University in 1994. I received M.S. and Ph.D.
`
`degrees in electrical engineering, in 1996 and 1998, respectively, from Stanford
`
`University.
`
`5.
`
`Throughout the course of my education, including my B.S., M.S., and
`
`Ph.D. degrees, I was involved in deposition technology for thin films, including
`
`sputtering technology, and more specifically reactive sputter technology. For
`
`example, during my PhD, I performed research on the deposition of films of metals,
`
`oxides, and semiconductors via sputtering, including Aluminum, Tungsten,
`
`Tungsten Silicide, Titanium, Titanium Nitride, and Silicon Dioxide.
`
`6.
`
`After completing my Ph.D.,
`
`I held multiple appointments
`
`simultaneously between 1998 and 2000. I served as a Consulting Assistant Professor
`
`in the Electrical Engineering Department of Stanford University. I also served as a
`
`Visiting Research Engineer in the Department of Electrical Engineering and
`
`Computer Sciences at the University of California, Berkeley, where my research
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 8
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`focused on 25nm metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor (MOSFET)
`
`design and fabrication. I worked on technologies for high-performance transistor
`
`processes, and I published several papers as a direct outcome of this technology
`
`development. As part of my research work both at Berkeley and at Stanford during
`
`this period, I performed research on the use of sputtering and reactive sputtering.
`
`7.
`
`During the same period, I also served as a founder and member of
`
`technical staff of Matrix Semiconductor, a startup company that developed high-
`
`density nonvolatile memories. At Matrix, I led much of the process development
`
`effort to develop a new type of memory. We made extensive use of sputtering and
`
`reactive sputtering in this work, and I led much of the process development in this
`
`regard. Matrix was subsequently acquired by Sandisk.
`
`8.
`
`In 2000, I became an assistant professor at the University of California,
`
`Berkeley in the Department of Electrical Engineering & Computer Sciences. In
`
`2005, I was promoted to the position of tenured Associate Professor, and in 2011, I
`
`was promoted to full Professor. In 2018, I became a full Professor of
`
`Microtechnology at EPFL in Switzerland, where I lead the Laboratory for Advanced
`
`Fabrication Technologies (LAFT). The lab focuses on the development and
`
`application of advanced additive fabrication techniques for realizing precision
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 9
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`microelectronic and electromechanical systems. As of 2020, I have completed my
`
`move to EPFL and have therefore converted to an adjunct appointment at Berkeley.
`
`9.
`
`Starting in 2004, I was a founding technical advisor for Kovio. Under
`
`my leadership, Kovio re-focused on RFID and RF anti-theft systems. I led the
`
`development of Kovio’s first commercial RFID tag product, including the design of
`
`both the tag and the reader. My involvement with Kovio ended with Kovio’s
`
`acquisition by Thin Film Electronics ASA, but Kovio continues to focus on this area.
`
`10.
`
`I co-founded Locix Inc. in 2014. Locix develops and sells a range of
`
`wireless-enabled products, including proprietary Wi-Fi-based RF localization
`
`systems and sub-GHz low-power wireless sensor networks. As CTO of Locix, I led
`
`the development of the entire Locix RF product portfolio. I continue to be involved
`
`with Locix on a regular basis.
`
`11.
`
`I have authored or co-authored over 200 technical papers in
`
`international journals and conferences and have been named an inventor or co-
`
`inventor on more than 50 patents, many of which cover aspects of thin film
`
`deposition and devices based on the same, including use of sputtering and reactive
`
`sputtering in this regard.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 10
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`III. MATERIALS REVIEWED
`13. The opinions contained in this Declaration are based on the documents
`
`I reviewed, my professional judgment, as well as my education, experience, and
`
`knowledge regarding systems and processes for sputtering-based deposition of films
`
`on substrates.
`
`14.
`
`In forming my opinions expressed in this Declaration, I reviewed the
`
`following materials:
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`Ex. 1004
`
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`Ex. 1005
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,342,134 to Barber et al.
`
`Ex. 1006
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,485,602 to Hirose
`
`Ex. 1007
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,651,865 to Sellers
`
`Ex. 1008
`
`A. Belkind et al., Pulsed-DC reactive sputtering of dielectrics:
`Pulsing parameter effects (2000)
`
`Ex. 1009
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,464,223 to Gorin
`
`Ex. 1010
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,132,564 to Licata
`
`Ex. 1011
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,942,089 to Sproul
`
`Ex. 1012
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,352,629 to Wang
`
`Ex. 1013
`
`S. Gibilisco, Handbook of Radio & Wireless Technology (1999)
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 11
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`
`Ex. 1014
`
`J. Joo, Low-temperature polysilicon deposition by
`magnetron sputtering (2000)
`
`ionized
`
`Ex. 1015
`
`B. Chapman, Glow Discharge Processes
`
`Ex. 1016
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,579,618 to Celestino
`
`Ex. 1017
`
`International Publication No. WO 02/23588 to Quon
`
`Ex. 1018
`
`International Publication No. WO 01/6300 to Johnson
`
`Ex. 1019
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,695,954 to Hong
`
`Ex. 1020
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,153,068 to Ohmi
`
`Ex. 1021
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,846,920 to Keller
`
`Ex. 1023
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,302,882 to Miller
`
`Ex. 1024
`
`Ex. 1025
`
`Ex. 1026
`
`Ex. 1029
`
`Ex. 1030
`
`Ex. 1031
`
`Ex. 1032
`
`Ex. 1033
`
`
`
`
`
`Pinnacle Plus+ 10KW (325-650 Vdc) Master/Slave AE Bus,
`DeviceNet, MDXL User, UHF Output User Manual (March 2005)
`The Advanced Energy MDX Magnetron Drive, Advanced Energy
`Industries, Inc. (March 1993)
`Pinnacle 10x6 kW DeviceNet, MDXL User 5702063-C, User
`Manual, (May 2000)
`E. Dogheche, Growth and optical characterization of aluminum
`nitride thin films deposited on silicon by radio-frequency
`sputtering, Applied Physics Letters (1999)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,506,686 to Masuda
`
`K. Nam, A study on the high rate deposition of CrN films with x
`controlled microstructure by magnetron sputtering, Surface &
`Coatings Technology (2000)
`D. Mattox, Handbook of Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD)
`Processing – Film Formation, Adhesion, Surface Preparation and
`Contamination Control (1998)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,830,327 to Kolenkow
`
`6
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 12
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`
`Ex. 1034
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2001/0041252 to Laird
`
`Ex. 1035 M. Ruske, Properties of SiO2 and Si3N4 layers deposited by MF
`twin magnetron sputtering using different target materials, Thin
`Solid Films (1999)
`Ex. 1036 W. Sproul, High-rate reactive DC magnetron sputtering of
`oxide and nitride superlattice coatings (1998)
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0029563 to Kaushal
`
`Ex. 1037
`
`Ex. 1038
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,627,323 to Nagaraj
`
`Ex. 1041
`
`S. Wolf et al., Silicon Processing for the VLSI Era, Vol. 1 (2000)
`
`Ex. 1046
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,657,260 to Yamazaki
`
`Ex. 1047
`
`Ex. 1048
`
`Ex. 1057
`
`Ex. 1058
`Ex. 1059
`
`Ex. 1060
`Ex. 1062
`
`Ex. 1065
`
`A. Billard, Low-frequency modulation of pulsed d.c. or r.f.
`discharges for controlling the reactive magnetron sputtering
`process, Surface & Coatings Technology (1996)
`P. Kelly, The deposition of aluminum oxide coatings by reactive
`unbalanced magnetron sputtering (1996)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,284,110 to Sill
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,148,133 to Zennamo
`P. Kelly et al., Reactive pulsed magnetron sputtering process for
`alumina films (2000)
`U.S. Patent Application No. 09/145,323 to Miller et al.
`Pinnacle 20 kW DeviceNet, MDXL User 5702199-A, User
`Manual, (April 2001)
`Pinnacle Plus Pulsed DC Power Supply Data Sheet (April 1999)
`
`Ex. 1067
`
`Pinnacle Plus 10kW User 5702269-B, User Manual, (June 2002)
`
`Ex. 1068
`
`Ex. 1069
`
`
`Japanese Patent Publication No. JPH10102247A to Aokura and
`certified English translation of JPH10102247A
`U.S. Patent Application Publication US 2001/0047838 to Segal
`
`I also considered any other documents and materials I refer to in this Declaration.
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 13
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`
`15. My opinions contained in this declaration are based on the documents
`
`I reviewed and my knowledge and professional judgment. My opinions have also
`
`been guided by my appreciation of how a person of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`have understood the state of the art, the prior art, and the claims and the specification
`
`of the ’276 patent at the time of the alleged invention, which I discuss below.
`
`16.
`
`I have been asked to initially consider that the time of the alleged
`
`invention of the ’276 patent was around 2002 (including and up to March 16, 2002),
`
`which corresponds to the filing date of the parent application for ‘276 patent. (Ex.
`
`1001, Cover.)
`
`17. Based on my experience and expertise, it is my opinion that certain
`
`references disclose and/or suggest all the features recited in challenged claims 1-13
`
`of the ’276 patent, as I discuss in detail below.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 14
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`IV. PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART AND THE TIME OF
`THE ALLEGED INVENTION
`I am familiar with the level of ordinary skill in the art regarding the
`18.
`
`’276 patent as of what I understand to be around the claimed priority date of March
`
`16, 2002. Considering the ’276 patent, the technology, the educational level and
`
`experience of workers in the field relating to the patent, and problems and solutions
`
`in that field (e.g., processes and related systems for sputtering deposition of films on
`
`substrates), and drawing on my own experience, I believe a person of ordinary skill
`
`in the art at the time of the alleged invention (around March 16, 2002) would have
`
`had a Master’s degree in Electrical Engineering or Material Science (or an equivalent
`
`subject) and at least two years of relevant experience, or a Bachelor’s degree in
`
`Electrical Engineering or Material Science (or an equivalent subject) and at least
`
`four years of relevant experience. Relevant experience in the context of the ’276
`
`patent refers to experience with sputtering deposition of films on substrates, as
`
`referenced in the ’276 patent. (See ’276 patent (Ex. 1001) at 1:10-14, 2:45-47.)
`
`19. My opinions in this Declaration regarding the ’276 patent and the
`
`prior art (including the state of the art) are from the perspective of one of ordinary
`
`skill in the art as I defined above, during the relevant timeframe (e.g., the time of
`
`the alleged invention), which I discussed above as being around March 16, 2002.
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 15
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`V. TECHNICAL BACKGROUND
`20. Below, I present a brief overview of certain aspects of systems and
`
`processes relating to the sputtering deposition of films on substrates prior to and at
`
`the time of the alleged invention for the ’276 patent. The functionalities and
`
`concepts I describe below in this technical background section reflect the state of the
`
`art that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have had knowledge of and
`
`understood prior to and at the time of the alleged invention of the ’276 patent. I rely
`
`on, and incorporate as applicable (even if not expressly mentioned below in Section
`
`IX), the following disclosures and opinions to support my opinions in this
`
`Declaration, including those opinions relating to how the prior art discloses and/or
`
`suggests the challenged claims of the ’276 and how and why a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art would have been motivated to consider and combined the disclosures
`
`and suggestions from that prior art as I explain below in Section IX. The concepts
`
`below would have been within the knowledge and mindset of a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art at the time.
`
`Sputter Deposition
`A.
`21. Sputter deposition, which was also often known as just “sputtering,” is
`
`a film deposition technique that takes place in a plasma process chamber, where a
`
`target is bombarded with gas ions, such as noble/inert gas (e.g., argon) ions. (Ex.
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 16
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`1007, 1:19-21; see also Ex. 1032, 6; Ex. 1041, 5-10 (discussions regarding the
`
`physics of sputtering).) Those of ordinary skill in the art understood that ionized gas
`
`was (and is) also known as a plasma. (Ex. 1041, 3-4 (disclosing that a plasma is a
`
`“partially ionized gas”).) In a sputtering process, the gas ion bombardment
`
`mechanically frees atoms of the target material, and the target material is then
`
`deposited, forming a film on a substrate placed in the plasma chamber. (Ex. 1007,
`
`1:21-23.) Argon was known generally as the gas of choice for sputtering processes
`
`because “it is easily available (hence low in cost), and its mass is a good match to
`
`those of the elements most frequently sputtered (Al, Cu, Si, and Ti).” (Ex. 1041, 8;
`
`see also Ex. 1032, 7 (“typically argon…is used for inert gas sputtering since it is a
`
`relatively inexpensive inert gas”).)
`
`22. Many types of target materials (e.g., element, alloy, or compound) were
`
`known and available for sputter deposition processes, which allowed for diverse
`
`fields of applications. (Ex. 1032, 18 (disclosing that one of the advantages of
`
`sputtering deposition is that the method is capable of sputtering “element, alloy, or
`
`compound” materials); see also id., 19-20 (disclosing a list of exemplary target
`
`materials available for sputtering for various fields of applications, e.g.,
`
`semiconductor devices, optical coatings, and wear/erosion-resistant coatings …
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 17
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`etc.); Ex. 1011, 3:58-60). For example, single element targets made of aluminum or
`
`silicon were well known before March 2002. (See e.g., Ex. 1005, 6:42-50.) It was
`
`also well known that a target may be made of an alloy, which contained, for example,
`
`both aluminum and silicon. (See e.g., Ex. 1034, ¶[0027].) It was also known that
`
`an alloy target may also include rare-earth ions, such as yttrium. (Ex. 1036, 6; Ex.
`
`1069, ¶¶[0041]-[0048].) Furthermore, oxides of yttrium-containing alloy such, as
`
`yttria-stabilized zirconia (YSZ), were known to be widely used as a thermal-barrier
`
`coating for its high-temperature capability. (Ex. 1038, 1:30-35.) Also, a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would have appreciated and known that an aluminum
`
`oxynitride layer (AlNxOy), deposited using a “reactive” sputtering technique (which
`
`I discuss in the next section below), was used in manufacturing displays, particularly
`
`useful for “blocking moisture and oxygen” and “to prevent impurity…from
`
`entering” semiconductor devices in the displays and the film also has other useful
`
`properties including “a high thermal conductivity, a heat radiation effect, and a very
`
`high light transmitting property.” (Ex. 1046, 19:34-39.)
`
`23. Typical sputtering systems were also known to include a substrate
`
`holder, upon which a substrate is positioned to face the target for film deposition.
`
`(See, e.g., Ex. 1005, FIG. 2 (disclosing a substrate platen 115, upon which a substrate
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 18
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`110 is positioned).) A wide range of substrate materials were known to be used,
`
`including, for example, silicon, quartz, sapphire, aluminum oxide (id., 3:63-65), or
`
`a piece of steel (Ex. 1011, 3:56-58). Additionally, those of ordinary skill in the art
`
`were aware, would have appreciated, and understood the benefits of monitoring and
`
`controlling the temperature of the substrate (via for example temperature control
`
`circuits or the like) to obtain a high-quality sputter deposited film (Ex. 1029, 2) and
`
`that the temperature can be controlled with a high accuracy (Ex. 1030, 1:33-40
`
`(disclosing temperature control within a plasma environment with an “accuracy of
`
`± 5 °C), 1:60-67 (disclosing temperature control within a plasma environment with
`
`“a high accuracy of ± 2 °C).)
`
`B. Reactive Sputter Deposition
`24. A reactive sputtering process differs from the above discussed
`
`sputtering process as it introduces one or more reactive gases (e.g., oxygen or
`
`nitrogen) in addition to the noble/inert gas (e.g., argon). (Ex. 1005, 2:5-7.)
`
`Typically, the reactive gases were known to have low atomic masses and known to
`
`be not as effective in sputtering. Therefore, a heavier noble/inert gas, such as argon,
`
`was known to be used in the reactive sputtering process to sputter the target material.
`
`(Ex. 1032, 8.)
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 19
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`
`25. The reactive gas reacts with the target material to produce a film that is
`
`sputtered onto the substrate. (Ex. 1005, 2:5-8; see also Ex. 1007, 1:7-11.) Reactive
`
`sputtering can be used for forming insulating layers, such as oxides or nitrides of a
`
`metal, by using a metallic or conductive target and an oxygen or nitrogen-containing
`
`reactive gas. (Ex. 1007, 1:11-14.) For example, a layer of aluminum oxide film may
`
`be formed by using an aluminum target and an oxygen-containing reactive gas. (Id.,
`
`1:27-29; see also id., 1:29-37 (describing that other types of target materials and
`
`reactive gases may be used).)
`
`26. One issue associated with reactive sputtering that those of ordinary skill
`
`in the art would have understood and appreciated was the buildup of insulating
`
`materials on the target surface, which was also known as “poisoning” of the target
`
`that may significantly reduce the sputtering rate and causes arcing on the target. (Ex.
`
`1007, 1:45-47; see also Ex. 1005, 2:37-43; Ex. 1048, Abstract.) It was therefore
`
`known to use a pulsed DC power supply (discussed further below) to reduce such
`
`arcing.
`
`C.
`27.
`
`Power Supplies Used for Reactive Sputtering
`It was known by those of ordinary skill in the art prior to March 2002
`
`to use in such reactive sputtering systems a power supply connected to the target to
`
`apply a bias in order to create a plasma and to facilitate sputtering. (See, e.g., Ex.
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1002, Page 20
`
`

`

`
`Declaration of Dr. Vivek Subramanian
`U.S. Patent No. 7,544,276
`
`
`1005, 6:6-8, FIG. 2; Ex. 1007, 9:32-37, FIG. 12.) Such skilled persons would have
`
`understood that a continuous (i.e., non-pulsed) DC power supply was typically not
`
`suitable for reactive sputtering because, once the target surface reacts with the
`
`reactive gas and forms an insulating layer (a “poisoned” target), charges buildup on
`
`the insulated target surface lead to arcing and also prevent bombardment/sputtering
`
`of the surface (e.g., ceasing or significantly hindering the sputter deposition process).
`
`(Ex. 1008, 1; see also Ex. 1007, 6:2-5 (discussing arcing’s deleterious effects on the
`
`target); Ex. 1032, 3.) Those of ordinary skill in the art at the time understood that
`
`such issues can be resolved through the use of a pulsed DC power supply, which
`
`reverses its negative bias to the positive bias periodically in order to discharge
`
`poisoned/in