Lam Research, PSK Clash Over Bevel Etcher Patent Drawings

Дата публикации: 14-08-2026 07:39:28

Lam Research and PSK clashed over how much of the design drawings for a key component should be disclosed in a patent-infringement lawsuit involving bevel etcher equipment. The court proposed a compromise under which it will review the original drawings of PSK's component at the next hearing.The fif

Основное содержимое страницы с новостью.

Lam Research and PSK clashed over how much of the design drawings for a key component should be disclosed in a patent-infringement lawsuit involving bevel etcher equipment. The court proposed a compromise under which it will review the original drawings of PSK's component at the next hearing.

The fifth hearing in Lam Research's lawsuit against PSK over alleged patent infringement was held August 13 at the Seoul Central District Court's 62nd Civil Division. Lam Research filed the suit in 2021, claiming PSK's bevel etcher infringed its patents and seeking 600 million won in damages, the amount stated in the complaint, as well as disposal of the equipment. PSK responded by seeking to invalidate the patents.

A bevel etcher is equipment used to remove unstable metal and nonmetal films formed along the edge, or bevel, of a wafer. PSK has successfully localized the technology and supplies the equipment to customers including SK hynix. Lam Research previously held a monopoly in the bevel etcher market. Lam Research describes its Coronus systems as plasma bevel etch equipment designed to remove residues from wafer bevel edges.

The focus of the hearing was the actual structure of an internal component in PSK's equipment. Lam Research calls the component a gas diffuser ring (GDR). It is used to distribute and control gas inside etch equipment such as bevel etchers.

A GDR has a ring-shaped structure with an opening in the center. Lam Research holds exclusive rights to the design under Patent No. 1,249,247, referred to as the 247 patent. PSK, by contrast, has argued that its component is a panel with a closed center.

Lam Research Says Component Name and Drawings Indicate Ring Structure

Kim & Chang, representing plaintiff Lam Research, said a document submitted by PSK as Exhibit 30 identifies the component as a "GDR," arguing that industry participants could readily understand that the component is a ring rather than a panel, as PSK claims.

Lam Research's legal team pointed to chamfers on the left and right edges of the component shown in the cross-sectional drawing. A chamfer is a machining process that cuts a sharp edge of a mechanical component at an angle to make the edge less sharp.

Lam Research's lawyers argued that if the component were a panel, as PSK claims, the cross section would have been shown with the left side, or half of the center, continuing like a wafer and with square corners. They said the chamfers on both edges were clear evidence that the center of the component was recessed, forming a ring structure.

Lam Research also challenged the masking of specifications such as the model number and dimensions in documents submitted by PSK. It said the masked information needed to be reviewed to initially determine whether the component was a ring or a panel. Lam Research therefore requested disclosure of the original documents without the redactions.

◇PSK Submits Equipment Operation Video

PSK's legal representative, BKL, countered that the use of "GDR" was merely a one-time naming error made in accordance with industry convention and that official documents such as the actual product specification sheet identify the component differently. It argued that Lam Research was pursuing an unreasonable claim that was contrary to the physical product based solely on a naming error.

PSK also emphasized that it had already submitted a video showing the equipment operating in real time. The video shows that PSK's PRECIA bevel etcher has no lower ring structure corresponding to a GDR and instead uses a panel structure with a closed center. Part of the video was shown in court during the hearing. PSK identifies PRECIA as one of its bevel etch equipment products.

Regarding the redacted information, PSK's lawyers argued that detailed dimensions and specifications unrelated to the component's shape constitute PSK's trade secrets. They said Lam Research, a direct competitor, was seeking to obtain a rival company's trade secrets under the guise of litigation.

PSK's legal team again proposed an on-site inspection of the actual equipment at its manufacturing plant, following the fourth hearing. Lam Research's lawyers rejected the proposal, saying PSK could potentially show a different product rather than the actual PRECIA equipment during the inspection.

◇Court to Review Original Drawings Without Redactions

As the two sides remained deadlocked, the court proposed a compromise. The court said that since Lam Research claimed the figures in the original materials could distinguish between a ring and a panel, PSK should bring the unmasked original drawings to the next hearing so they could be reviewed in the courtroom.

The approach would allow the court to examine the original materials with the relevant figures visible, as Lam Research requested, without formally submitting the documents into the record. The aim is to avoid creating a record that could expose trade secrets.

PSK's lawyers asked the court to review the original drawings first. If further examination is deemed necessary, one lawyer from Lam Research's legal team will be allowed to conduct an additional review. Lam Research's lawyers agreed.

Lam Research also formally withdrew its infringement claim concerning the 221 patent, one of the patents at issue, registered under No. 1,468,221. The patent was ruled invalid by the Patent Court. Lam Research had filed a trial seeking correction of the scope of the patent rights with the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board, but the petition was rejected August 3.

The next hearing in the two companies' bevel etcher patent lawsuit is scheduled for September. The course of the case is expected to become clearer depending on the review of the original drawings and whether the two sides proceed with expert examinations.

Схожие новости

#	Наименование новости	Тональность	Информативность	Дата публикации
1	Nolito: “Los tres puntos nos saben a gloria”	0	0	26-01-2020
2	AZ HB2890	0	0	13-02-2025
3	Coronavirus: Greece Closes Eight Schools in Athens, Bans All School Trips Abroad	0	0	28-02-2020
4	3 kişinin hayatını kaybettiği silahlı kavgada 7 kişi tutuklandı | Video	0	0	27-02-2025
5	🎬 Хотите работать в кадре, быть телеведущим или блогером? Мечты ...	0	0	10-03-2023
6	Как научить ребенка кататься на коньках: пошаговое руководство	0	0	15-04-2024
7	Из-за коронавируса закрыли Лувр	0	0	02-03-2020
8	Consequences of the US 2024 Presidential Election: Global Geopolitics Edition	0	0	21-02-2025
9	Kiedy nie umiesz w przegrywanie	0	0	22-02-2020
10	В 2019 году объем ВРП Татарстана увеличился до 2,5 трлн рублей	0	0	10-02-2020

Классификация: Наука. Схожих патентов: 0. Схожих новостей: 10. Тональность: 0. Информативность: 6.72. Источник: thelec.net.