STC.UNM v. Intel Corporation

Filing 133

MARKMAN RESPONSE BRIEF re 110 Brief filed by STC. UNM. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 3 - IEDM Article, # 2 Exhibit 4 - Semiconductor International Article, # 3 Exhibit 5 - 998 Response and Amendment 01141999, # 4 Exhibit 6 - 998 Response and Amendment 05181999, # 5 Exhibit 7 - Declaration of Dr. Chris Mack)(Pedersen, Steven)

Exhibit 7 
Declaration of Dr. Chris Mack 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

STC.UNM,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil No. 1:10-cv-01077-RB-WDS
INTEL CORPORATION

Defendant.

DECLARATION OF DR. CHRIS MACK
59. In furtherance of my Declaration, dated June 21, 2011, I, Chris Mack, under penalty of
perjury, state as follows:
60. STC explained in the prosecution history that the patent discloses two separate embodiments,
to achieve high spatial frequencies, namely pattern density and square corners.
The presently claimed invention alters the frequency distribution of the
final structure by (i) increasing the pattern density in the plane of the
wafer to periods less than λ/2 in at least one direction (interpolation of the
gratings); and (ii) changing the features of a pattern in a desirable way
without increasing the density such as, for example, round holes to
square holes.
Exh. 5 [Response and Amendment, January 14, 1999], at 8 (emphasis added).
While Intel’s construction seeks to remove (ii) from the ‘998 patent, STC’s construction retains
this important result of the invention.
61. With respect to the embodiments disclosed in Figures 6 and 7, which disclose the fabrication
of sharp corners, the applicants stated in the file history that the changes in magnitudes and
phases of the Fourier coefficients produce higher spatial frequencies.
The presently claimed invention also changes magnitudes and phases of
the Fourier coefficients between the process described by (expose,
expose, nonlinear) and (expose, nonlinear, expose, nonlinear). Figures 6
and 7 exemplify this result by the demonstration of the round hole to
square hole transition. Both of the patterns have the same spatial
1

frequencies; however, the round (or elliptical) holes have a distribution of
frequencies that radiates outward from the center of frequency space,
while the square holes have frequencies only in the x and y directions
perpendicular to the sides of the holes. The roll-off of the magnitudes of
the Fourier coefficients is a more rapid function of the magnitude of the
frequency in the round case than in the square case.
Id., at 9 (emphasis added).
62. Consistent with STC’s construction, the inventors further stated in the prosecution history
that the “increase in frequency” result from an increase in the number of “significant terms”
in the Fourier series. Id., at 7.
63. Thus, the applicants did indeed state that the formation of square holes changes the frequency
distribution of the final structure. By combining the patterns, the magnitudes and phases of
the spatial frequencies in the final pattern are increased beyond the limit of a linear optical
system, which, as the patent explicitly states, are the high spatial frequencies necessary to
create patterns with sharp corners.
there is still significant rounding of the corners . . . due to the
unavailability of the spatial frequencies needed to provide sharp corners . .
. the magnitudes of the spatial frequencies necessary to define these
corners are greater than 2/λ, the limit of a linear optical system. Exh. 1
[‘998 Patent, 7:28-33] emphasis added.
64. Intel misrepresents the meaning of “both of the patterns have the same spatial frequencies”
on page 19 of its brief.
65. As explained by Intel’s own expert: “The lowest spatial frequency terms for a given pattern
represent its basic shape, location, and periodicity. These terms may be sufficient to image
the basic structure of a pattern. The higher spatial frequency terms represent the finer feature
detail, such as the sharp edges.” Smith Dec. [Doc 111], at ¶7.
66. STC was correct when it stated that the patterns can have the same spatial frequencies, e.g.,
corresponding to basic shape, location and periodicity, as explained by Intel’s expert, but also
have higher spatial frequencies present that correspond to “the finer feature detail, such as the
sharp edges” (sharp corners), as also explained by Intel’s expert. By increasing the
magnitude of the higher spatial frequency terms, round corners can become sharp corners.
67. My explanation of how Intel’s construction is incompatible with the idea of a combined mask
that is the multiplication of the two individual patterns (¶¶38-58) is based upon the presence
or absence of photoresist. If the absence of photoresist or hardmask is defined as the null (the
most common definition), Intel’s construction is incompatible with the idea of a combined
mask that is the multiplication of the two individual patterns. If the presence of photoresist or
hardmask is defined as the null, Intel’s construction is incompatible with the idea of a
combined mask that is the addition of the two individual patterns. Importantly, in both
2

scenarios, Intel’s construction is only compatible with one of the operators (multiplication or
addition), and not both.

Date: July 25, 2011
Dr. Chris Mack 

3