STC.UNM v. Intel Corporation

Filing 147

STC.UNM'S REPLY BRIEF ON THE ISSUE OF CLAIM CONSTRUCTION re 113 Brief, filed by STC. UNM. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 8 - [Excerpts from] Smith Deposition, # 2 Exhibit 9 - Smith Dep Exh 2, # 3 Exhibit 10 - RIT Website, # 4 Exhibit 11 - Smith Dep Exh 9, # 5 Exhibit 12 - Smith Dep Exh 10, # 6 Exhibit 13 - Smith Dep Exh 11, # 7 Exhibit 14 - Smith Dep Exh 12, # 8 Exhibit 15 - Smith Dep Exh 5)(Pedersen, Steven)

Exhibit 8
[Excerpts from] Smith Deposition Testimony

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

3

---oOo---

4
5
6
7
8

STC.UNM,

)
Plaintiff,
)
) Case No.: 10-CV-01077-RV-DWS.
vs.
)
Volume 1
)
Pages 1 to 211
INTEL CORPORATION,
)
Defendant.
)
________________________)

9
10
11
12
13

DEPOSITION OF BRUCE SMITH

14

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

15
16
17

Reported by:

18

HEIDI BELTON, CSR, RPR, CRR, CCRR

19

Certified Shorthand Reporter No. 12885

20

_________________________________________________________

21

JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

22

WORLDWIDE DEPOSITION & VIDEOGRAPHY SERVICES

23

701 Battery Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94111

24

[phone] or [phone]

25
1
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

09:05:04

1

09:05:05

2

09:05:06

3

09:05:09

4

(Whereupon, the witness, BRUCE SMITH,

09:05:10

5

having been duly sworn, testified as follows:)

09:05:17

6

09:05:20

7

17:25:44

8

09:05:27

9

09:05:31

10

09:05:34

11

research and technology from 2000 to 2007; is that

09:05:41

12

correct?

09:05:41

13

09:05:44

14

09:05:45

15

Q.

And did that terminate in 2007?

09:05:50

16

A.

Yes.

09:05:53

17

Q.

What happened?

09:05:54

18

A.

Intel no longer provides that funding to the

09:05:56

19

09:06:01

20

Q.

What was the funding?

09:06:02

21

A.

It was a --

09:06:03

22

MR. HUR:

09:06:04

23

You may answer.

09:06:07

24

THE WITNESS:

09:06:11

25

STC.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER:

If there are no

stipulations, the reporter may swear in the witness.

MR. HUR:

I'd like to represent for the record

that Dr. Chris Mack is also with us.
EXAMINATION
BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

Dr. Smith, you were the Intel professor of

A.

At Rochester Institute of Technology; that's

correct.

In 2007, that time frame, yeah.

microelectronic engineering department.

Object to the form.

It was a -- an affiliate

membership fee that Intel paid to the microelectronic
7
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

09:06:15

1

engineering department.

09:06:18

2

affiliates of microelectronic engineering to pay the

09:06:22

3

department to support some of the activities and

09:06:24

4

students and equipment and things like that.

09:06:26

5

BY MR. STADHEIM:

09:06:26

6

09:06:31

7

09:06:32

8

09:06:35

9

that, an arrangement was made between Intel and RIT's

09:06:40

10

development office that Intel would be allowed to have

09:06:44

11

naming rights to a professorship for the association fee

09:06:48

12

they paid.

09:06:49

13

Q.

Kind of like how they name football stadiums?

09:06:52

14

A.

Well, to a much lesser --

09:06:54

15

MR. HUR:

09:06:55

16

THE WITNESS:

09:06:57

17

yeah, universities that is a common thing.

09:07:00

18

BY MR. STADHEIM:

09:07:01

19

Q.

09:07:03

20

much money?

09:07:04

21

MR. HUR:

09:07:06

22

THE WITNESS:

09:07:07

23

wasn't an endowment, which often these types of things

09:07:11

24

were.

09:07:15

25

it.

Q.

It's common for a lot of the

And that's why you have the title Intel

professor?
A.

Right.

In 2000 or maybe it was a year before

Object to form.
To a much lesser extent.

But,

"Lesser extent," meaning you didn't get as

Object to the form.
Right.

And the term was -- it

This was an arrangement with a limited term to

8
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

09:15:22

1

question in a general sense, that's different than if

09:15:25

2

you're asking if what she said is true.

09:15:29

3

expect what she said is true because she said it to me.

09:15:32

4

BY MR. STADHEIM:

09:15:33

5

Q.

Was it important to you or not?

09:15:35

6

A.

Okay.

09:15:38

7

09:15:39

8

Q.

Yes.

09:15:40

9

A.

Yes.

09:15:40

10

Q.

Very important?

09:15:40

11

A.

Well, very compared to what; it was important,

09:15:47

12

09:15:47

13

Q.

And you were considering at one time

09:15:48

14

increasing -- asking Intel to increase the amount from

09:15:52

15

$50,000 to $100,000; isn't that right?

09:15:58

16

09:16:02

17

at a $100,000 level, I believe in 2000 or maybe 1999.

09:16:10

18

A few years after that I came to understand

09:16:12

19

that Intel because of economic reasons decided for some

09:16:18

20

period of time they would reduce that to $50,000.

09:16:23

21

some time had passed -- and, again, I don't have the

09:16:25

22

dates in front of me, but I see this is from 2006 --

09:16:28

23

both Ms. Stevens and I felt it might be a good time to

09:16:31

24

ask Intel if they would increase that back to what their

09:16:36

25

original promise was.

I -- I -- I

Is that the question, was the Intel

professorship important to me?

yes.

A.

Intel initially agreed to support the position

Since

15
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

09:16:38

1

Q.

But you didn't do that?

09:16:39

2

A.

Well, instead --

09:16:40

3

MR. HUR:

09:16:41

4

THE WITNESS:

09:16:43

5

wasn't the one that dealt with Intel.

09:16:47

6

this e-mail, I wasn't sure whether or not Ms. Stevens

09:16:50

7

had done it.

09:16:51

8

09:16:54

9

09:17:00

10

who took over for Ms. Stevens.

09:17:04

11

two years that lapsed since 2006 and 2008 I hadn't heard

09:17:08

12

anything else from Ms. Stevens.

09:17:10

13

the situation was.

09:17:12

14

BY MR. STADHEIM:

09:17:12

15

Q.

09:17:18

16

to you?

09:17:21

17

A.

09:17:26

18

or this exhibit, Ms. Stevens in the July 25, 2006

09:17:33

19

section of this exhibit says, in I believe the third

09:17:40

20

sentence, "I'd like to talk to you about whether we

09:17:42

21

should look at another company for your professorship."

09:17:47

22

She says that, "Intel is stating they would only be able

09:17:50

23

to make 50K." Again, and she wanted to go somewhere else

09:17:54

24

to support this professorship.

09:17:59

25

back to her on August 9 saying well, if it's -- it's not

Object to the form.
-- you asked if I did that.

I

At the time of

And if you see the top of this exhibit you
gave me, I corresponded with Ms. Eileen Galinski in 2008
And you can see in those

So I didn't know what

Why was the Intel professorship so important

Well, if you look at the bottom of that e-mail

Can you see I responded

16
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

09:18:03

1

all about the money.

09:18:07

2

with the microelectronic engineering department like

09:18:10

3

many of our affiliates do.

09:18:14

4

there are other things besides just the money besides

09:18:17

5

just the 50K.

09:18:20

6

Q.

What?

09:18:20

7

A.

Well, what I've said is they hire our

09:18:23

8

students.

09:18:29

9

companies on developing engineering courses.

09:18:34

10

is a member of the semiconductor research corporation

09:18:37

11

called SRC.

09:18:40

12

industrially -- industrial partners of SRC, has helped

09:18:45

13

support an SRC research project.

09:18:49

14

out to Ms. Stevens that there are other things that

09:18:51

15

Intel does besides just this 50K they provide to us.

09:18:55

16

09:18:58

17

09:19:02

18

09:19:06

19

09:19:24

20

09:19:25

21

August 9 correspondence I had with Ms. Stevens, I've

09:19:30

22

said that Intel has directed customization funding for

09:19:36

23

over $300,000 between 2007 and 2009.

09:19:41

24

money; that was money from the Semiconductor Research

09:19:42

25

Center, SRC.

Q.

Intel does some important things

And I suggested to her that

I work with Intel among other groups and
And Intel

And Intel, along with several other

So I -- I was pointing

Other than what you said in that document,

were there any other reasons it was important to you?
A.

I think I've -- in 2006 I think I stated that

pretty well, as I can recollect.
I would also like to point out that in that

That was not Intel

17
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

09:23:51

1

industrial affiliates and asks them for contribution to

09:23:54

2

the engineering program.

09:23:57

3

to ask them for this contribution.

09:24:00

4

very common.

09:24:05

5

asking Intel for a gift.

09:24:19

6

09:24:25

7

09:24:27

8

09:24:32

9

09:24:37

10

Intel was paying these dues between 2006 and 2008, as we

09:24:43

11

see from Exhibit 2.

09:24:48

12

internet and the web and all, I'm sure there are legacy

09:24:52

13

references to my Intel professorship that go beyond

09:24:57

14

2007.

09:24:58

15

09:25:01

16

09:25:09

17

09:25:12

18

09:25:13

19

Q.

So you lost this and nobody told you?

09:25:16

20

A.

Sounds odd, but yes, that's the way it --

09:25:18

21

09:25:20

22

Q.

Wow.

09:25:21

23

A.

Well, let me say this.

09:25:24

24

09:25:29

25

Q.

She's telling me she's going
That's -- that's

It's not unusual at all.

She would be

Now, after you lost this title of Intel

professor, did you keep on using it?
A.

I believe I may have in 2008.

Again, I wasn't

completely aware of what had been going on, whether

Q.

Also, there are the nature of the

Well, so when did you find out that you didn't

have this title anymore?
A.

I believe in 2008 time frame, but I can't -- I

can't recall exactly.

that's the way it transpired.

support.
Q.

We lost the financial

And I wasn't aware of that.
But you kept the title?
21

JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

09:25:31

1

09:25:33

2

not I changed that on my CV or changed that on our web

09:25:37

3

page.

09:25:40

4

title is.

09:25:45

5

this support was.

09:25:50

6

It was only in name.

09:25:53

7

09:25:55

8

MR. HUR:

09:25:56

9

THE WITNESS:

09:25:58

10

value in this.

09:25:59

11

BY MR. STADHEIM:

09:25:59

12

Q.

Sure you did.

09:26:04

13

A.

I think I -- I told you I kept using it until

09:26:07

14

about 2008.

09:26:24

15

(Whereupon Exhibit 4 marked

09:26:24

16

for identification.)

09:26:24

17

09:26:35

18

09:26:43

19

the bottom e-mail here, which is dated March 31, 2009 is

09:26:53

20

an e-mail from you to Gene, and it starts, "This is

09:26:58

21

Bruce Smith, the Intel Professor of Microelectronic

09:27:03

22

Engineering at RIT."

09:27:06

23

09:27:07

24

A.

Yes, I did.

09:27:10

25

Q.

Does that refresh your recollection that you

A.

Well, keeping the title just means whether or

You know, I don't -- beyond that that's all the

Q.

I think that also -- it also goes to what
It was no obligation I had to Intel.

A name that you were proud of?
Object to the form.
Well, as I said before, I found

And you kept using it?

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

Exhibit 4 is Smith document produced 11.

And

Did you write that?

22
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

10:30:10

1

10:30:12

2

10:30:12

3

10:30:13

4

Q.

-- isn't he?

10:30:16

5

A.

He -- we go back -- if you'll allow me to go

10:30:19

6

back to the paragraph we talked about at the top.

10:30:21

7

Again, the goal is to reproduce this pattern -- which is

10:30:25

8

a pattern, Figure 1 -- "with as high a fidelity as

10:30:29

9

possible."

10:30:31

10

10:30:37

11

10:30:40

12

"While the image is significantly closer to the desired

10:30:45

13

pattern than the incoherent imaging results, there is

10:30:51

14

still significant rounding of the corners of the printed

10:30:53

15

features due to the unavailability of the spatial

10:30:56

16

frequencies needed to provide sharp corners."

10:31:01

17

10:31:04

18

desires sharp corners and he does not want round corners

10:31:11

19

or rounded corners?

10:31:16

20

MR. HUR:

10:31:17

21

THE WITNESS:

10:31:18

22

inventor -- Professor Brueck is saying that the goal is

10:31:23

23

sharp corners and he wants sharp corners.

10:31:25

24

BY MR. STADHEIM:

10:31:25

25

corners -MR. HUR:

Object to the form.

BY MR. STADHEIM:

And the fidelity would include the sharp

corners.
Q.

Let me read the entire sentence.

"While" --

Do you agree that what he's saying is he

Q.

Object to the form.
I would agree that the

And -44
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

11:37:57

1

provide a multiplication of the individual images that

11:38:01

2

have been operated on independently with the nonlinear

11:38:05

3

thresholding responses of the two photoresist layers.

11:38:11

4

The composite mask patterns shows substantially right

11:38:15

5

angles at the corners as predicted by equation 6 and

11:38:21

6

Figure 6B."

11:38:24

7

Q.

11:38:27

8

question is in all four discussions of Figures 2, 3, 6,

11:38:36

9

and 7, Dr. Brueck talks about square corners, sharp

11:38:43

10

11:38:49

11

11:38:52

12

11:38:55

13

11:38:58

14

you had originally asked me, but I -- I would agree that

11:39:03

15

corners -- well-defined sharp corners are discussed,

11:39:17

16

yes.

11:39:17

17

BY MR. STADHEIM:

11:39:17

18

11:39:20

19

MR. HUR:

11:39:21

20

THE WITNESS:

11:39:23

21

corners are addressed in all four of these.

11:39:24

22

BY MR. STADHEIM:

11:39:25

23

11:39:27

24

about increasing pattern density; isn't that also

11:39:31

25

correct?

So the answer to my question is yes.

And my

corners, corners; isn't that right?
MR. HUR:

Objection; vague.

Compound.

Asked

and answered.
THE WITNESS:

Q.

I'm not sure that's the question

In all four of those?

Q.

Object to the form.
I think it's true, right sharp

And in none of those discussions does he talk

74
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

11:39:32

1

11:39:34

2

11:39:37

3

11:39:39

4

reference to increased pattern density in those

11:39:43

5

excerpts.

11:40:28

6

(Whereupon Exhibit 5 marked

11:40:28

7

for identification.)

11:40:28

8

11:41:06

9

11:41:09

10

which has three patterns on it, which for purposes of

11:41:25

11

what we're talking about you can assume those are

11:41:28

12

contact poles, printed and a resist.

11:41:46

13

imagine that these patterns were formed by an imaging

11:41:53

14

tool where the -- which the image is a square hole --

11:42:08

15

let me start over again.

11:42:19

16

11:42:23

17

you do that?

11:42:25

18

A.

Okay.

11:42:26

19

Q.

Okay.

11:42:30

20

numerical aperture from low to high.

11:42:38

21

which of these figures would result by doing that?

11:42:43

22

11:42:45

23

11:42:52

24

11:42:56

25

MR. HUR:
Vague.

Object to the form.

Compound.

Asked and answered.
THE WITNESS:

As I said before, there is no

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

Dr. Smith, I've handed you Smith Exhibit 5,

Now, if you

Assume that the mask has a square hole.

Can

And now we're going to change the

MR. HUR:

Can you tell me

Object to the form.

Incomplete hypothetical.
THE WITNESS:

Vague.

Outside the scope.
So these -- you have told me

these are features printed in a photoresist, correct?
75
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

11:58:38

1

11:58:39

2

the specification that talks about increasing pattern

11:58:45

3

density.

11:58:48

4

there is -- there's a lot in this patent about

11:58:50

5

increasing pattern density.

11:58:52

6

BY MR. STADHEIM:

11:58:52

7

Q.

11:58:55

8

asked about.

11:58:55

9

A.

11:58:57

10

me because you said most of the time it has to do with

11:59:00

11

square corners, so my answer is no.

11:59:40

12

11:59:43

13

11:59:43

14

11:59:47

15

transmit more or less spatial frequencies than a high

11:59:52

16

numerical aperture imaging tool?

11:59:55

17

11:59:56

18

12:00:00

19

12:00:01

20

question?

12:00:03

21

sure.

12:00:03

22

BY MR. STADHEIM:

12:00:04

23

12:00:08

24

transmit more or less spacial frequencies than a high

12:00:12

25

numerical aperture imaging tool?

THE WITNESS:

No.

I think there's plenty in

We haven't looked at it in those sections, but

I didn't ask about that.

I asked about what I

No, I think -- well, no, I think you did ask

Q.

Does a low numerical -- let me start over

again.
Does a low numerical aperture imaging tool

MR. HUR:
hypothetical.

Object to the form.

It's beyond the scope.

THE WITNESS:

Q.

Incomplete

It should -- can you repeat the

I think I understand it but I want to make

Does a low numerical aperture imaging tool

89
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

12:00:15

1

MR. HUR:

12:00:16

2

THE WITNESS:

12:00:19

3

situation, we have to talk about the use of that tool.

12:00:21

4

So everything else being equal?

12:00:23

5

MR. STADHEIM:

12:00:24

6

THE WITNESS:

12:00:25

7

aperture tool would indeed transmit lower frequencies

12:00:34

8

than a high numerical aperture tool.

12:00:36

9

BY MR. STADHEIM:

12:00:36

10

12:00:45

11

and we could change the numerical aperture and we

12:00:48

12

started with A in Figure -- in Smith Exhibit 5, as we go

12:00:58

13

from A to B to C, the spatial frequencies being

12:01:05

14

transmitted would increase; is that correct?

12:01:10

15

12:01:11

16

12:01:15

17

THE WITNESS:

12:01:22

18

you said is a photoresist image.

12:01:27

19

these different numerical apertures that you just

12:01:30

20

described have already gone through -- have already been

12:01:36

21

operated on by this photoresist.

12:01:40

22

images that -- and I think I answered this already --

12:01:44

23

that would have resulted from increasing numerical

12:01:46

24

aperture -- everything else being equal -- I would

12:01:49

25

suspect that A would be the lowest, C would be the

Q.

Same objections.
So if we set up a hypothetical

Yes.
I would say a low numerical

And so if we had one numerical aperture tool

MR. HUR:
hypothetical.

Object to the form.

Vague.

Incomplete

Scope.
You have shown me what I think
And the images from

So the photoresist

90
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

C is the Square on Smith
Ex. 16

[phone]
Dep. Ex. 5; Brief

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

12:01:52

1

highest numerical aperture, and B would be the results

12:01:55

2

from somewhere in between.

12:01:59

3

photoresist in this case.

12:02:00

4

BY MR. STADHEIM:

12:02:01

5

12:02:03

6

12:02:04

7

12:02:05

8

MR. HUR:

12:02:06

9

THE WITNESS:

12:02:09

10

paper.

12:02:12

11

haven't discussed or thought about, then I've got no

12:02:14

12

reason to believe it wouldn't be that direction of

12:02:18

13

numerical aperture.

12:02:37

14

12:02:38

15

12:02:39

16

MR. STADHEIM:

12:02:39

17

THE VIDEOGRAPHER:

12:02:40

18

12:02:42

19

(Recess taken from 12:02 p.m. to 12:03 p.m.)

12:03:21

20

THE VIDEOGRAPHER:

12:03:22

21

12:03 p.m.

12:03:29

22

BY MR. STADHEIM:

12:03:30

23

12:03:37

24

the numerical aperture from low to high and go from A to

12:03:40

25

B to C, the density of the holes doesn't change, does

Q.

The results printed in

Actually, you don't just suspect that; you

actually know that, don't you?
A.

It's hypothetical.
Object to the form.
This is a cartoon on a piece of

So -- unless there's some other things that we

MR. HUR:

Can we go off the record for one

second?
Sure.
Off the record at

12:02 p.m.

Q.

Back on the record at

Now still looking at Exhibit 5.

As we changed

91
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

12:52:56

1

sentence.

12:52:59

2

frequencies in the x-y plane do result in higher pattern

12:53:02

3

density."

12:53:05

4

on to read "higher spatial frequencies do not

12:53:09

5

necessarily result" -- I'm sorry -- "do not necessarily

12:53:12

6

result in sharper corners or smaller feature size.

12:53:16

7

example, as stated by the applicants during the

12:53:20

8

prosecution history, a feature that is square shaped can

12:53:23

9

have the same spatial frequency as a feature that is

12:53:28

10

round even though the square has sharper corners in the

12:53:31

11

x-y plane than the round feature.

12:53:35

12

larger size can have the same or greater spatial

12:53:37

13

frequency than the smaller sizes -- or smaller

12:53:42

14

features."

12:53:45

15

same declaration is -- paragraph 7 -- "The higher

12:53:53

16

spatial frequency terms represent the finer feature

12:53:55

17

detail." and that's what I'm addressing also in

12:53:59

18

paragraph 10.

12:54:10

19

Q.

12:54:14

20

12:54:21

21

12:54:23

22

also compare fundamental terms of two scenarios and talk

12:54:28

23

about whether one is higher than the other one.

12:54:29

24

12:54:32

25

The part that says, "While higher spatial

That sentence goes on -- that paragraph goes

For

Moreover, features of

And what I think I've said in my -- in that

Okay.

You have the fundamental terms and then

the higher spatial frequency terms; is that right?
A.

Q.

Higher than the fundamental, sure.

But we can

Let's just talk about the fundamental terms

and all the rest of them.

Okay?
124

JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

12:54:34

1

A.

Fair enough.

12:54:34

2

Q.

Okay.

12:54:42

3

understand higher spatial frequency, the only terms that

12:54:45

4

you take into account are the fundamental terms?

12:54:52

5

MR. HUR:

12:54:52

6

THE WITNESS:

12:54:54

7

paragraph 7 and 10 where it said higher spatial

12:54:56

8

frequency is the finer feature detail.

12:55:01

9

BY MR. STADHEIM:

12:55:02

10

12:55:05

11

12:55:07

12

A.

Exhibit 6?

12:55:07

13

Q.

Yeah.

12:55:13

14

A.

To answer which question?

12:55:17

15

Q.

Well, you answered the question with regard to

12:55:21

16

12:55:23

17

A.

Yes.

12:55:23

18

Q.

And you circled three?

12:55:27

19

A.

Right.

12:55:27

20

Q.

And the rest of them didn't count, right?

12:55:29

21

12:55:31

22

12:55:32

23

12:55:33

24

those three determine or are linked to or are related to

12:55:41

25

pattern density.

Q.

Isn't it the fact that as you

Object to the form.
No.

I just read to you

In Figure 6, what terms did you look at to

determine spatial frequencies?

I'm not sure.

pattern density.

MR. HUR:

Objection.

Mischaracterizes prior

testimony.
THE WITNESS:

I said -- I said in this case

125
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

12:55:41

1

12:55:41

2

Q.

12:55:44

3

that right?

12:55:45

4

12:55:46

5

12:55:48

6

12:55:50

7

12:55:51

8

12:55:56

9

12:55:59

10

MR. HUR:

12:56:01

11

THE WITNESS:

12:56:02

12

there are two meanings of higher --

12:56:05

13

BY MR. STADHEIM:

12:56:05

14

12:56:09

15

12:56:12

16

12:56:16

17

or all of paragraph 10?

12:56:19

18

of paragraph 10 I'll explain it to you.

12:56:20

19

12:56:23

20

clarifying is that when I'm -- in my question right now

12:56:25

21

when I'm talking about higher spatial frequencies, I

12:56:28

22

mean whatever you meant when you used that term in

12:56:32

23

paragraph 10.

12:56:34

24

A.

12:56:36

25

BY MR. STADHEIM:
And the rest of them didn't impact it; isn't

MR. HUR:

Objection; misstates prior

testimony.
THE WITNESS:

In this scenario, right.

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

And pattern density is the way you determine

higher spatial frequencies, right?

Q.

Object to the form.
No, I -- there are two higher --

Higher spatial frequencies as used by you in

paragraph 10 that we've read about five times.
A.

Q.

Right.

All of -- an excerpt from paragraph 10
If you'll allow me to use all

You can use all you want; I'm just -- all I'm

Okay?

Well, there are two -- when we talk about

higher, there are two ways we can talk about higher.
126
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

12:56:40

1

12:56:46

2

12:56:48

3

as you used it in paragraph 10 when you said "in the

12:56:52

4

context of the '998 patent, higher spatial frequencies

12:56:56

5

in the x-y plane do not -- do result in higher pattern

12:57:00

6

density in that plane."

12:57:04

7

spatial frequencies there.

12:57:09

8

12:57:09

9

12:57:10

10

12:57:11

11

12:57:15

12

you circled in Exhibit 6 have no impact on higher

12:57:25

13

spatial frequencies; is that right?

12:57:26

14

MR. HUR:

12:57:28

15

THE WITNESS:

12:57:29

16

MR. HUR:

12:57:29

17

12:57:29

18

12:57:31

19

MR. HUR:

12:57:38

20

THE WITNESS:

12:57:39

21

used higher that I think is consistent with the '998

12:57:45

22

patent.

12:57:47

23

compare.

12:57:52

24

about higher:

12:57:56

25

orders, we can also talk about higher than those

I'm trying to answer your question now.
Q.

I am talking about higher spatial frequencies

A.

As you used the term higher

Right.
MR. HUR:

And what's the question?

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

My question is the terms other than those that

Object to the form.
I didn't say that.

Vague.

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

I'm asking that.
Asked and answered several times.
There are two ways that I have

If I -- and you've given me the scenario to
If I compare Figure 1 to Figure 2, we can talk
If we take a look at the fundamental

127
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

12:57:58

1

fundamental orders for any individual figure.

12:58:01

2

BY MR. STADHEIM:

12:58:01

3

Q.

Which one applies to the claim language?

12:58:05

4

A.

They -- they both would.

12:58:15

5

Q.

When you used the term "higher spatial

12:58:17

6

frequencies," in the sentence that we've read

12:58:21

7

ad nauseam, did you have something in mind as to what

12:58:26

8

you meant?

12:58:27

9

A.

Yes, I did.

12:58:30

10

Q.

And which of these two higher spatial

12:58:32

11

12:58:34

12

MR. HUR:

12:58:35

13

THE WITNESS:

12:58:37

14

got two parts.

12:58:38

15

BY MR. STADHEIM:

12:58:38

16

Q.

12:58:41

17

that I read.

12:58:43

18

A.

And you won't let me include the second part.

12:58:49

19

Q.

Let's back up.

12:58:50

20

12:58:52

21

for a while.

12:58:54

22

line.

12:58:57

23

lunch?

12:58:58

24

MR. STADHEIM:

12:58:58

25

MR. HUR:

frequencies did you have in mind when you said that?
Object to the form.
All of them.

This sentence has

So that -- I'm talking about the first part

MR. HUR:

Rolf, I mean you've been going along

I appreciate you may want to finish this

But when do you think we'll be able to break for
It's already -Very shortly.

-- 1:00.
128

JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

12:58:58

1

12:59:12

2

12:59:14

3

patent, higher spatial frequencies in the x-y plane do

12:59:17

4

result in higher pattern density in that plane," when

12:59:22

5

you said that, what were you referring to, when you

12:59:27

6

said, "higher spatial frequencies"?

12:59:30

7

12:59:31

8

12:59:32

MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

Very shortly.

When you said "In the context of the '998

A.

For that part of that sentence you're asking

9

Q.

That part of that sentence.

12:59:33

10

A.

For that part of the sentence it is the

12:59:35

11

fundamental orders becoming higher in frequency that

12:59:40

12

correlates to a higher pattern density.

12:59:43

13

that means.

12:59:45

14

Q.

12:59:49

15

number 1 of Exhibit 6, all the spatial frequency terms

12:59:55

16

other than the three that you've circled have no impact

12:59:59

17

on higher spatial frequencies; isn't that correct?

13:00:02

18

13:00:04

19

13:00:07

20

13:00:08

21

13:00:08

22

13:00:08

23

13:00:08

24

13:00:11

25

me?

A.

That's what

That's what I meant by that.

Okay.

And in that context, as we look at

In the context of that part of that paragraph.

The rest of that paragraph, though, I'm addressing that.
Q.

Exactly.
MR. HUR:

Object to the form --

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

The answer's yes?
MR. HUR:

-- it's vague.

It's an incomplete

hypothetical.
129
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

14:17:10

1

above the surface?

14:17:11

2

MR. HUR:

14:17:12

3

Mischaracterizes testimony.

14:17:16

4

14:17:18

5

14:17:18

6

Q.

The color black as opposed to the color white.

14:17:21

7

A.

This isn't a black fill.

14:17:24

8

This figure shows outlines.

14:17:27

9

depicts black and white.

14:17:30

10

Q.

How do you know that?

14:17:31

11

A.

Because there's no fill.

14:17:33

12

and all I see is outlines.

14:17:39

13

me that there are lines and spaces depicted here.

14:17:46

14

Q.

If it were black, would it make a difference?

14:17:49

15

A.

If it were black it wouldn't show what the

14:17:51

16

picture intends to show.

14:17:54

17

the difference between the outline of a photoresist

14:17:56

18

pattern in solid and the outline of the masked dash.

14:18:00

19

they're filled in, you wouldn't be able to recognize one

14:18:04

20

over the other.

14:18:05

21

14:18:08

22

14:18:13

23

14:18:14

24

Dr. Mack's book as I was finding examples that showed

14:18:23

25

black-and-white-filled lithography patterns.

Object to the form.

THE WITNESS:

Black in what sense?

I said --

BY MR. STADHEIM:

Q.

This is an outline.

This isn't a figure that

This is a figure that --

I'm looking at it

I don't think you can tell

This picture intends to show

Let me ask you this:

If

When you prepared your

declaration, did you look at this figure?
A.

I'm sure I did.

I looked through most of

146
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

14:18:28

1

14:18:29

2

14:18:33

3

14:18:36

4

14:18:38

5

Q.

The answer --

14:18:38

6

A.

It's a different --

14:18:39

7

Q.

The answer to my question is yes?

14:18:41

8

A.

Can you ask your question again.

14:18:42

9

Q.

You chose not to include this figure in the

14:18:44

10

14:18:49

11

14:18:52

12

14:20:17

13

(Whereupon Exhibit 9 marked

14:20:17

14

for identification.)

14:20:17

15

14:20:32

16

14:20:41

17

patent, number 5,067,002.

14:20:55

18

patent that Intel is relying on as part of its

14:21:06

19

allegation that the patent here in suit is invalid.

14:21:18

20

14:21:38

21

A.

I see that.

14:21:38

22

Q.

And look at reference number 92 and also look

14:22:00

23

14:22:06

24

14:22:07

25

Q.

And you chose not to include this figure in

your declaration exhibit; is that right?
A.

It's not a figure that shows black-and-white

filling.

exhibit to your declaration; isn't that right?
A.

I think Dr. Mack's got hundreds of figures.

I've only included a few.

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

Okay.

I've handed you Exhibit 9 which is a
And this was a -- or is a

Would you please look at Figure 4A.

at column 7, line 61.
MR. HUR:

Counsel, I'm going to object to any

questioning about prior art references.

That is
147

JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

14:28:02

1

14:28:06

2

14:28:08

3

Rolf, that if you're going to ask him a question about

14:28:10

4

this patent, you've got to give him time to review it.

14:28:14

5

92 does cover -- appears, at least on first glance, to

14:28:16

6

cover a whole bunch of parts of that figure.

14:28:26

7

BY MR. STADHEIM:

14:28:27

8

14:28:31

9

14:28:34

10

14:28:36

11

14:28:37

12

14:28:39

13

don't know what that is.

14:28:39

14

BY MR. STADHEIM:

14:28:40

15

Q.

You'd take an hour to find it out?

14:28:48

16

A.

It might.

14:28:48

17

(Whereupon Exhibit 10 marked

14:28:48

18

for identification.)

14:29:30

19

14:29:38

20

14:29:58

21

number 5,741,625.

14:30:06

22

is relying on in this case for its assertion that the

14:30:10

23

patent-in-suit is invalid.

14:30:15

24

14:30:21

25

white.
MR. HUR:

Q.

This just highlights the point,

So your position is you'll need an hour to

study this patent to see whether that's a hole or not?
MR. HUR:

Well, why don't you give him some

time to start?
THE WITNESS:

Whether to say what that is.

I

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

I've handed you Exhibit 10, which is patent
And this is another patent that Intel

Would you please look at Figure 3D and column
5, line 42, please.
153
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

14:30:53

1

14:30:55

2

14:30:56

3

Q.

Do you see 38A in Figure 3D?

14:30:59

4

A.

I see that.

14:31:00

5

Q.

And that is white; is it not?

14:31:05

6

A.

In a -- it appears white, yes.

14:31:09

7

14:31:22

8

14:31:25

9

14:31:26

10

A.

That's a very good point.

14:31:28

11

Q.

So why did you say it's bounded by black?

14:31:31

12

14:31:32

13

one line of a patent he hasn't seen that's on our prior

14:31:36

14

art list.

14:31:39

15

think you've got to give him a fair chance to review the

14:31:42

16

patent if you're going to be asking him questions about

14:31:45

17

it.

14:31:48

18

pretty familiar with.

14:31:55

19

BY MR. STADHEIM:

14:31:55

20

14:32:01

21

14:32:02

22

witness -- you should give the witness whatever time he

14:32:04

23

needs to review the patent.

14:32:09

24

14:32:11

25

A.

(Witness reviews document.)
I see that.

But it's

surrounded by -- it's bounded by black.
Q.

If it weren't bounded by black you couldn't

see it, could you?

MR. HUR:

Counsel, again, you're pointing to

It's not a deposition about our prior art.

I

This is not like the '998 that he's, you know,

Q.

Is 38A a hole?
MR. HUR:

Same objections.

THE WITNESS:

I think the

Well, what I've said in my

declaration, I've used the word "convention" and I've
154
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

14:32:19

1

used the word "typical."

14:32:24

2

through the '625 or '002 patent, I'm not surprised that

14:32:31

3

you could find references that show things contrary to

14:32:35

4

the convention or what I've said is typical.

14:32:39

5

14:32:41

6

any of it; this is the first time I've ever seen it --

14:32:44

7

as I said, 38A is bound -- it's outlined by a dark line.

14:32:49

8

And what you said is well, if it wasn't, you wouldn't

14:32:52

9

know it was there.

14:32:54

10

not a color photograph.

14:32:58

11

it might have a color.

14:33:01

12

clear doesn't necessarily mean it's a hole.

14:33:10

13

BY MR. STADHEIM:

14:33:10

14

Q.

It's not a hole, is it?

14:33:11

15

A.

I don't have --

14:33:12

16

MR. HUR:

14:33:13

17

THE WITNESS:

14:33:14

18

it's a hole and now --

14:33:15

19

MR. HUR:

14:33:16

20

THE WITNESS:

14:33:19

21

believe it's anything.

14:33:20

22

BY MR. STADHEIM:

14:33:20

23

Q.

14:33:21

24

not a hole?

14:33:22

25

Although I haven't read

For the '625 patent -- although I haven't read

That's exactly the point is this is
If it was a color photograph,
The fact that it's white or

Object to the form -I don't have reason to believe

-- way outside the scope.
-- I don't have reason to

You can't look at that picture and say it's

MR. HUR:

Counsel, that's not fair.
155

JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

14:33:24

1

Objection.

14:33:26

2

fairly review it to fairly answer your question or I'm

14:33:30

3

going to object that it's outside the scope and

14:33:34

4

incomplete hypothetical.

14:33:36

5

14:33:38

6

14:34:35

7

(Whereupon Exhibit 11 marked

14:34:35

8

for identification.)

14:34:35

9

14:34:49

10

14:34:52

11

is patent number 6,022,815.

14:35:00

12

patent that Intel is relying on in this case for its

14:35:07

13

allegation that the patent-in-suit is invalid.

14:35:10

14

14:35:20

15

14:35:53

16

A.

I see that.

14:35:56

17

Q.

Okay.

14:36:00

18

14:36:07

19

A.

I see that.

14:36:09

20

Q.

And then above that you see a layer that is

14:36:14

21

white, 220?

14:36:19

22

A.

I see that.

14:36:21

23

Q.

And then you see another layer that's hash

14:36:26

24

14:36:29

25

Either you're going to give him a chance to

THE WITNESS:

I could tell you what that is if

I'm given enough time to read the patent.

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

Okay.

I've handed you Smith Exhibit 11, which
And this is still another

Would you please look at Figures 2F, 1 and 2;
and also Figures 245 -- I'm sorry -- 2C and 2D.

Let's look at Figure 2C.

You see some

hash-marked material that's referenced 230, right?

marked the opposite way; that's 210?
A.

I see that.
156
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

14:51:05

1

14:51:05

2

14:51:09

3

14:51:14

4

A.

14:51:17

5

opaque.

14:52:01

6

(Whereupon Exhibit 12 marked

14:52:01

7

for identification.)

14:52:02

8

14:52:04

9

14:52:10

10

14:52:19

11

A.

I see that, yes.

14:52:22

12

Q.

And you are the Bruce W. Smith that's named

14:52:25

13

the inventor?

14:52:26

14

A.

That's right.

14:52:33

15

Q.

Would you turn to page 3 -- column 3 and at

14:52:38

16

14:52:46

17

A.

Yes, I see that.

14:52:47

18

Q.

It says, "Examples of such sub-lithographic

14:52:50

19

14:53:01

20

A.

I see that.

14:53:05

21

Q.

And the "anti-scattering bars," what does the

14:53:07

22

14:53:12

23

14:53:14

24

14:53:20

25

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

A bar that was clear rather than opaque.

You

mean a hole versus a bar?
No.

I mean a bar that was clear rather than

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

Okay.

is your patent.

I've handed you Exhibit 12.

And this

U.S. 6,881,523 B2; is it not?

That's me.

line 15.

features are scattering bars and anti-scattering bars."

"anti" modify; scattering or bars?
A.

Well, it's -- as I said a few minutes ago,

it's anti, dash, scattering.
Q.

So as -- you're testifying that these bars are
167
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

14:53:27

1

14:53:28

2

MR. HUR:

14:53:31

3

THE WITNESS:

14:53:32

4

examples from a patent, the '014 patent, which I don't

14:53:47

5

see right away as a reference.

14:53:55

6

14:54:00

7

the '014 patent used the word "scattering" and

14:54:05

8

"anti-scattering," I'm not entirely clear.

14:54:15

9

cases these are bars, consistent with what Dr. Mack has

14:54:20

10

14:54:22

11

14:54:25

12

bars that are two types.

14:54:30

13

scattering bars are dark and the anti-scattering bars

14:54:33

14

are light; they're both bars.

14:54:35

15

14:54:36

16

the bars that I've drawn follow the convention that we

14:54:41

17

talked about where the speckled area is the presence of

14:54:49

18

something and the clear or white area is the absence of

14:54:52

19

something.

14:55:04

20

BY MR. STADHEIM:

14:55:05

21

14:55:06

22

14:55:14

23

14:55:16

24

testimony.

14:55:17

25

BY MR. STADHEIM:

anti-scattering?
Objection; vague.
What I've listed here is

The reason why the inventors of this patent,

In both

written about in terms of bars.
What I'm saying here is basically there are
The scatter bar -- the

And you see in the drawings that I've used,

Q.

Okay.

So you're saying that an

anti-scattering bar is still a bar; it's not a hole?
MR. HUR:

Objection; mischaracterizes his

It's vague.

168
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

14:55:17

1

Q.

Is that correct?

14:55:18

2

A.

No, I didn't say that.

14:55:22

3

what I said is that the bar can either be clear or

14:55:25

4

opaque.

14:55:30

5

clear.

14:55:38

6

an opaque feature.

14:55:44

7

14:55:50

8

14:55:54

9

A.

I hope I've already answered that.

14:55:56

10

Q.

Well --

14:55:57

11

A.

It says "anti-scattering," so it modifies

14:56:00

12

scattering.

14:56:02

13

at the '014 patent to see why the inventors chose to use

14:56:07

14

the words "scattering" and "anti-scattering."

14:56:10

15

cases it's a bar.

14:56:11

16

14:56:13

17

is what you said.

14:56:18

18

sub-lithographic features are scattering bars and

14:56:21

19

anti-scattering bars."

14:56:24

20

knew what you were talking about; is that correct?

14:56:26

21

14:56:27

22

MR. HUR:

14:56:28

23

THE WITNESS:

14:56:29

24

I said, "Such as disclosed in U.S. Patent Number

14:56:32

25

5,821,014 (incorporated herein by reference)."

Q.

I didn't know what --

A scatter bar is opaque, an anti-scatter bar is
Which means a bar can be either a hole or a -I think it's all consistent.

My question is what does "anti" modify?

Does

it mean it's not a bar or is it not scattering?

Q.

A.

Technically beyond that we'd have to look

In both

It seems to me what we're talking about here
You said, "Examples of such

I presume when you said that you

Well, it's -Object to form.
Well, let's finish the sentence.

So -169

JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

14:56:37

1

14:56:38

2

14:56:39

3

were talking about when you said "anti-scattering bar";

14:56:43

4

isn't that right?

14:56:44

5

14:56:46

6

14:56:49

7

14:56:52

8

time and still believe that an anti-scattering bar is

14:56:58

9

not a scattering bar?

14:57:00

10

14:57:05

11

14:57:07

12

14:57:09

13

believe today is that US Patent '014 talks about both,

14:57:13

14

scattering bars and anti-scattering bars.

14:57:16

15

BY MR. STADHEIM:

14:57:16

16

Q.

A scattering bar scatters light; does it not?

14:57:21

17

A.

It's not that simple; and the word

14:57:23

18

"scattering" may not be appropriate -- an appropriate

14:57:26

19

name which is why I said it's a name that is more of a

14:57:29

20

marketing name than what is physically taking place.

14:57:31

21

Q.

What do you understand a scattering bar does?

14:57:34

22

A.

A scattering bar influences the defracted

14:57:40

23

energy field of a mask pattern and its projected image

14:57:46

24

through the optical system.

14:57:48

25

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

A.

And my question is you understood what you

I knew that these are examples of

subresolution lithographic features, yes.
Q.

And you're saying that you believed at that

MR. HUR:

Objection; vague.

Object to the

form.
THE WITNESS:

Q.

What I'm saying here and I still

Does an anti-scattering bar do the same thing?
170
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

14:57:50

1

14:57:53

2

14:57:54

3

14:57:58

4

an anti-scattering bar and a scattering bar does the

14:58:02

5

same thing?

14:58:03

6

MR. HUR:

14:58:04

7

THE WITNESS:

14:58:07

8

14:58:08

9

Q.

That wasn't my question.

14:58:12

10

A.

Okay.

14:58:18

11

14:58:21

12

14:58:23

13

it came out to be, the word "scattering bar" refers to

14:58:29

14

that function?

14:58:32

15

MR. HUR:

14:58:36

16

THE WITNESS:

14:58:38

17

real thing that's used -- forget about the name --

14:58:41

18

carries out that function.

14:58:43

19

that feature, also carries out that same function for a

14:58:51

20

different type of -- different type of mask feature.

14:58:53

21

BY MR. STADHEIM:

14:58:54

22

14:58:57

23

and an anti-scattering bar is one is a bar, and one is a

14:59:03

24

hole or a trench; isn't that right?

14:59:06

25

A.

It will do -- it will carry out a similar

function, yes.
Q.

So whatever scattering is in there for, both

Object to the form.
They're both bars.

BY MR. STADHEIM:

Do they do the same thing?

They serve

the same function for different applications.
Q.

Q.

A.

And whether it's a marketing term or however

Objection; vague.
The scattering bar, the physical

The anti-scattering bar,

And the difference between a scattering bar

That's wrong.
171
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

14:59:07

1

MR. HUR:

14:59:08

2

THE WITNESS:

14:59:09

3

MR. HUR:

14:59:10

4

14:59:11

5

Q.

What's the difference?

14:59:12

6

A.

They are both bars.

14:59:14

7

opaque.

14:59:17

8

Q.

14:59:19

9

14:59:21

10

14:59:23

11

14:59:25

12

Q.

When you say opaque, what do you mean?

14:59:27

13

A.

It means there is -- there is material in the

14:59:37

14

bar.

14:59:46

15

There is something there.

15:00:20

16

Q.

15:00:22

17

declaration.

15:00:39

18

15:00:47

19

you say, "I note that an essential element of Dr. Mack's

15:00:51

20

logic turns on his assumption that the white rectangles

15:00:54

21

of Figure 1 of the '998 patent represent upward

15:00:58

22

projecting 'posts' or 'pillars' rather than 'holes'

15:01:07

23

(openings)," -- italicized -- "and that therefore all

15:01:17

24

white or clear portions of all figures in the patent

15:01:21

25

represent posts rather than holes."

Objection -That's wrong.

-- to form.

BY MR. STADHEIM:

A scattering bar is

An anti-scattering bar is clear.
So what is the difference between

anti-scattering bar and a scattering bar?
A.

I just finished saying that.

is opaque.

A scattering bar

An anti-scattering bar is clear.

There is -- there is opacity, there's opaqueness.

All right.

Let's turn back to your

Looking at the first sentence in paragraph 4

172
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

15:50:13

1

4; that Dr. Brueck is assigning a 1 to the presence of

15:50:20

2

resist and a 0 to the absence of resist?

15:51:05

3

15:51:08

4

But since it's using tau, it may be consistent with

15:51:11

5

that.

15:51:17

6

Q.

15:51:19

7

to study it?

15:51:25

8

A.

15:51:40

9

15:51:42

10

15:53:28

11

THE WITNESS:

15:53:28

12

Okay.

15:53:30

13

MR. STADHEIM:

15:53:50

14

15:53:54

15

15:53:56

16

top of 13, which I think is called equation 6, Brueck

15:54:03

17

describes that as spatial frequency multiplying.

15:54:09

18

the spatial frequencies are multiplied, I would agree

15:54:15

19

that what he shows is this is a function of tau.

15:54:24

20

BY MR. STADHEIM:

15:54:25

21

15:54:30

22

what you already concluded from Figure 4; that he's

15:54:37

23

assigning a 1 to the presence of resist and a 0 to the

15:54:41

24

absence of resist?

15:54:44

25

A.

I'm not sure if that's what that tells me.

Is this a situation where you need more time

Yes.

Give me a few more minutes.

MR. HUR:

I'm also going to object to the

scope.
(Witness reviews document.)

What was your question again?
Read the question, please.

(Record read.)
THE WITNESS:

Q.

A.

If I look at the equation, the

And as

Does that also teach you that -- or confirm

For the case of spatial frequency multiplying,
189
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

15:54:49

1

15:55:30

2

15:55:34

3

15:55:36

4

A.

Okay.

15:55:37

5

Q.

And specifically lines 32 to 36.

15:55:54

6

A.

Okay.

15:55:56

7

Q.

Is tau being applied there?

15:56:10

8

A.

Well, it says it's a similar calculation, so I

15:56:13

9

15:56:16

10

equation 6.

15:56:22

11

Q.

15:56:25

12

absence of resist in that section?

15:56:40

13

to 36?

15:56:57

14

MR. HUR:

15:58:25

15

THE WITNESS:

15:58:26

16

through the assignment of tau values of 0 and 1,

15:58:30

17

actually, I don't believe that's correct.

15:58:36

18

closer at columns 13, tau is the thresholding function

15:58:40

19

and the values of 0 and 1 are the developed photoresist

15:58:47

20

thickness.

15:58:52

21

thresholding has been applied.

15:58:56

22

values of 0 and 1 are associated.

15:58:59

23

developed photoresist thicknesses, not the values of

15:59:03

24

tau.

15:59:05

25

BY MR. STADHEIM:

I believe that's what he's doing.
Q.

All right.

Now would you turn to column 13 of

the patent, Exhibit 1, please.

assume that means it was similar to what was done in

And is 1 being assigned to resist and 0 to
Column 13, lines 32

Object to the form.
Although we have just stepped

And as I look

Tau of E1X and E2X simply means that that
It doesn't imply that
Those are the

190
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

15:59:28

1

15:59:33

2

MR. HUR:

15:59:36

3

THE WITNESS:

15:59:37

4

which gives -- which turns the aerial image E1 of X into

15:59:45

5

a steep profile pattern.

15:59:50

6

thresholding.

15:59:55

7

multiplication -- shows us the multiplication of two

15:59:59

8

threshold resists.

16:00:00

9

BY MR. STADHEIM:

16:00:14

10

Q.

Does it have a numerical value as its output?

16:00:20

11

A.

Brueck doesn't tell us what the numerical

16:00:22

12

value is or how it's calculated.

16:00:28

13

Figure 5 that tau produces resist features with steep

16:00:36

14

side walls.

16:00:38

15

Dr. Brueck, the value -- the values of those -- that

16:00:47

16

profile, I suspect he would have included it in Figure

16:00:52

17

5B.

16:00:53

18

16:00:56

19

16:00:59

20

A.

Didn't we learn what?

16:01:01

21

Q.

That the 1's and 0's are assigned.

16:01:05

22

A.

No.

16:01:08

23

16:01:10

24

Q.

No, no.

16:01:12

25

Q.

What is the value of the output of tau then?

Q.

Object to the form.
Tau is a thresholding operation,

It's the operation of

So equation 6 says a thresh- -- the

He emphasizes in

If it was important to Brueck --

But didn't we learn this from looking at

Figure 4?

This isn't a plot for assigning 1's and

0's.
But didn't we learn that from Figure

4 already?
191
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

16:01:13

1

MR. HUR:

16:01:16

2

THE WITNESS:

16:01:18

3

developed photoresist thickness.

16:01:22

4

photoresist thickness remains, I agree that that in

16:01:26

5

thickness terms is a thickness value of 1.

16:01:30

6

thresholding function.

16:01:35

7

thresholding function operates on an exposure dose.

16:01:39

8

output of that thresholding function is Figure 5B or

16:01:44

9

things that look like that.

16:01:47

10

the patent that shows tau to be numbers.

16:01:55

11

BY MR. STADHEIM:

16:01:56

12

16:02:03

13

being assigned to resist and 0 is being assigned to the

16:02:07

14

absence of resist, are you?

16:02:09

15

16:02:13

16

16:02:13

17

16:02:21

18

exercise per paragraph 8 of your second declaration

16:02:26

19

where you assign the 1's and 0's, did you take Figure 4

16:02:30

20

into account?

16:02:32

21

A.

16:02:34

22

thresholding, which eliminates all possibilities but

16:02:38

23

resist being there or resist not being there.

16:02:43

24

16:02:51

25

Q.

Object to the form.
The output for Figure 4 is
If all your

Tau is a

Equation 6 says that that
The

There is no assignment in

You're not disagreeing, however, that 1 is

A.

In terms of normalized thickness, I agree with

Q.

And when you were -- decided to do your

that.

Q.

Figure 4 -- yes, I did.

Figure 4 provides the

Did you -- did you know at the time that you

did the work for paragraph 8 in your declaration that
192
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

16:13:19

1

into said substrate using a combined mask,' not just

16:13:24

2

some of the pattern."

16:13:26

3

16:13:27

4

portion of that statement that says "The claim language

16:13:31

5

makes clear that all of the first pattern and all of the

16:13:34

6

second pattern must be transferred into the substrate"?

16:13:39

7

16:13:42

8

16:14:17

9

16:14:20

10

pattern and all of the second pattern must be

16:15:04

11

transferred, yes.

16:15:05

12

BY MR. STADHEIM:

16:15:05

13

16:15:16

14

16:15:23

15

A.

Okay.

16:15:25

16

Q.

And what you have depicted there is what is

16:15:31

17

taught in Figure 8 of the patent-in-suit; isn't that

16:15:37

18

right?

16:15:38

19

A.

That's -- that's right.

16:15:48

20

Q.

And the resulting pattern you depict on the

16:15:53

21

right-hand side where it says "Pattern multiplication";

16:15:58

22

is that right?

16:16:00

23

MR. HUR:

16:16:01

24

THE WITNESS:

16:16:03

25

My question is do you agree with the first

MR. HUR:

Object to the form.

Object to the

scope.
THE WITNESS:

Q.

I agree that all of the first

Now would you look at your second declaration

Exhibit 7, paragraph 8.

the question.

I'm there.

Object to the form.
Can you -- I didn't understand

Can you repeat the question?
197

JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

16:16:05

1

16:16:07

2

16:16:11

3

16:16:14

4

A.

That's right.

16:16:15

5

Q.

Okay.

16:16:19

6

pattern multiplication, that's the result of combining

16:16:24

7

the first and second pattern, correct?

16:16:29

8

A.

That's correct, yes.

16:16:37

9

Q.

And that does not show that all of the first

16:16:39

10

pattern and all of the second pattern is transferred

16:16:43

11

into the substrate; isn't that correct?

16:16:45

12

MR. HUR:

16:17:45

13

THE WITNESS:

16:17:47

14

of the first pattern and the second pattern on top of it

16:17:50

15

is transferred onto the substrate.

16:17:54

16

BY MR. STADHEIM:

16:18:03

17

16:18:10

18

above pattern multiplication in your paragraph 8 in

16:18:15

19

Exhibit 11, the portion that is white in the colored

16:18:21

20

picture is what is in the substrate; isn't that correct?

16:18:26

21

A.

That's right.

16:18:27

22

Q.

And none of the rest of it is in the

16:18:28

23

16:18:30

24

A.

That's correct.

16:18:31

25

Q.

So how can you possibly say that all of the

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

You have -- you have three drawings there,

first pattern, second pattern, multiplication.

Q.

And the final of those, the one above

Object to the form.
No.

I think that shows that all

As you look at the final pattern, which is

substrate?

198
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

16:18:34

1

first pattern and all of the second pattern was

16:18:38

2

transferred into the substrate?

16:18:44

3

16:18:47

4

first pattern and all of the second pattern transferred

16:18:50

5

into the substrate.

16:18:51

6

16:18:54

7

as set forth in paragraph 8 or Intel's assertion on page

16:19:00

8

24 of its first brief Exhibit 13?

16:19:05

9

16:19:21

10

16:19:28

11

necessary that Figure 8 be covered by claim 6.

16:19:37

12

a discussion of claim 6 in the mask patterns related to

16:19:46

13

claim 6.

16:19:48

14

BY MR. STADHEIM:

16:19:48

15

16:19:51

16

16:19:57

17

16:19:59

18

response to Dr. Mack's declaration.

16:20:10

19

assignment -- I'm sorry -- that staggered bars must be

16:20:14

20

opaque.

16:20:47

21

Q.

16:20:53

22

16:20:58

23

A.

Yes, I believe I am.

16:21:04

24

Q.

If one employs that interpretation and one

16:21:16

25

A.

I stand corrected.

Q.

So what is wrong?

MR. HUR:

Is it your interpretation

Object to the form.

THE WITNESS:

Q.

It doesn't show all of the

Well, I don't think it's
This is

Well, if Figure 8 is not covered by claim 6,

why were you talking about it?
A.

It was addressed -- it was to -- it was in
That our

Are you familiar with Intel's interpretation

of combined mask?

uses your assignments of the 1's and 0's, can you get
199
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

16:21:21

1

16:21:27

2

16:21:33

3

16:21:33

4

16:21:35

5

I haven't looked at whether or not we can get addition

16:21:38

6

in Figure 8.

16:21:39

7

BY MR. STADHEIM:

16:21:46

8

16:21:50

9

16:22:06

10

that in Figure 8, depending on how the numbers are

16:22:19

11

assigned, either you can't get addition or you can't get

16:22:23

12

multiplication; you can only get one of them?

16:22:27

13

16:22:31

14

16:22:32

15

16:22:34

16

"getting."

16:22:38

17

here I've showed multiplication, how it would work in

16:22:41

18

a -- in an embodiment of the '998 patent, particularly

16:22:45

19

the Figure 8 embodiment.

16:22:50

20

can see in Figures 9 and 10 that work with this

16:22:53

21

convention of white areas depicting holes and being

16:22:58

22

represented by the number 1.

16:23:01

23

Figure 9 and 10.

16:23:03

24

BY MR. STADHEIM:

16:23:03

25

addition in Figure 8?
MR. HUR:

Object to the form.

It's vague.

Compound.
THE WITNESS:

Q.

Can we get addition in Figure 8?

Did you figure out or did anyone tell you that

if Intel's construction of combined mask were adopted,

MR. HUR:

Objection; vague.

Compound.

Object

to the form.
THE WITNESS:

Q.

I guess I'm not really clear on

I think using this convention that I show

The addition embodiment you

Addition would work for

I'm not talking about 9 and 10.

I'm talking
200

JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

16:23:05

1

about 8.

16:23:10

2

figured it out or somebody told you that if Intel's

16:23:18

3

construction of combined mask were adopted, then either

16:23:22

4

you can't get addition in claim 8 or you can't get

16:23:26

5

multiplication, depending on how you assign the 1's and

16:23:30

6

0's?

16:23:30

7

16:23:32

8

16:23:33

9

16:23:34

10

16:23:35

11

16:23:36

12

It's an incomplete hypothetical.

16:23:57

13

THE WITNESS:

16:23:59

14

and multiplication.

16:24:02

15

BY MR. STADHEIM:

16:24:03

16

16:24:05

17

multiplication.

16:24:08

18

the 0's in a particular way -- 1's mean one thing and

16:24:15

19

0's mean another thing.

16:24:19

20

can't get addition.

16:24:22

21

can get addition but you can't get multiplication.

16:24:25

22

simply asking you did you figure that out, or did

16:24:28

23

somebody tell that you?

16:24:29

24

16:24:32

25

A.

And I'm asking you a question of whether you

In claim 8.
MR. HUR:

Object.

BY MR. STADHEIM:
Q.

I'm sorry.
MR. HUR:

Q.

Figure 8.
Object to the form.

It's vague.

I believe you can get addition

I didn't ask whether you can get addition and
I'm asking if you assign the 1's and

MR. HUR:
compound.

If you get multiplication, you

If you assign it the other way, you

Objection.

It's vague.

I'm

It's

It's an incomplete hypothetical.
201

JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

16:24:39

1

16:24:40

2

answer that question because I think I've answered it.

16:24:43

3

I believe you can get addition and multiplication using

16:24:46

4

this numbering.

16:24:46

5

BY MR. STADHEIM:

16:24:47

6

16:24:51

7

is -- is 1 and the dark is 0.

16:24:57

8

both addition and multiplication of Figure 8.

16:25:06

9

what you're saying?

16:25:09

10

16:25:10

11

MR. HUR:

16:25:10

12

THE WITNESS:

16:25:11

13

That's where I don't understand the question.

16:25:16

14

is -- it says "Figure 8 shows an exemplary result" --

16:25:22

15

I'm reading from column 13 -- "of multiplying two

16:25:25

16

patterns."

16:25:39

17

BY MR. STADHEIM:

16:25:40

18

16:25:48

19

tell you or did you figure out yourself that if Intel's

16:25:52

20

construction of combined mask were adopted, the result

16:25:57

21

would be that you can either get multiplication or

16:26:03

22

addition, but you can't get both?

16:26:06

23

MR. HUR:

16:26:09

24

vague than the last question.

16:26:11

25

hypothetical.

THE WITNESS:

Q.

So the numbers you've assigned where the white

A.

Q.

I really don't know how to

You believe you can get
Is that

Figure 8 -Objection to form.
-- is a multiplication figure.
Figure 8

It's multiplication.

Okay.

Let's just talk in general.

Object to the form.

Did anyone

It's even more

It's an incomplete

It's compound.
202

JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]

BRUCE SMITH - SEPTEMBER 14, 2011

16:26:18

1

16:26:18

2

that you can't get both and asking me if somebody told

16:26:22

3

me that.

16:26:22

4

BY MR. STADHEIM:

16:26:23

5

16:26:25

6

whether one, you figured it out yourself or two,

16:26:28

7

somebody told you.

16:26:31

8

happened or it didn't happen.

16:26:33

9

or no or you've forgotten.

16:26:37

10

MR. HUR:

16:26:38

11

that it's compound at least.

16:26:42

12

still compound.

16:26:44

13

It clearly cannot be answered by a yes or no, given

16:26:49

14

now -- especially now how you've just described it.

16:26:53

15

16:26:54

16

I -- that I wasn't told and I don't believe that's a

16:27:06

17

conclusion that I've drawn.

16:27:20

18

BY MR. STADHEIM:

16:27:20

19

16:27:21

20

16:27:32

21

MR. HUR:

16:27:49

22

THE WITNESS:

16:27:51

23

16:28:03

24

16:28:06

25

THE WITNESS:

Q.

I'm asking you a factual question about

Either of those.

That either

The answer is either yes

I think -- I think you've admitted
It's still vague.

It's

It's still an incomplete hypothetical.

THE WITNESS:

Q.

So you're asking me to assume

It sounds like something that

Have you considered one way or the other

whether Figure 8 of the patent is covered by claim 6?
Object to the form.
I don't believe that Figure 8 is

covered by claim 6.
MR. STADHEIM:

Let's take a quick break here

and I'll try to wrap things up.
203
JAN BROWN & ASSOCIATES

[phone]

or

[phone]