<It seemed that there was at least one (we have never been told WHICH patent they have signed for)that the phototronics/electro-optics/camera companies continued to sign with even though the re-exams were still underway.>

Heck, that was an intriguing question. Is there some claim in one of the patents that is really a killer claim hmmmmmmmmm......

IMHO it is the first part of claim 1 of the 749 patent. Particularly the underlined.

1. A microprocessor system, comprising a central processing unit integrated circuit, a memory extend of said central processing unit integrated circuit, a bus connecting said central processing unit integrated circuit to said memory, and means connected to said bus for fetching instructions for said central processing unit integrated circuit on said bus from said memory, said means for fetching instructions being configured and connected to fetch multiple sequential instructions from said memory in parallel and supply the multiple sequential instructions to said central processing unit integrated circuit during a single memory cycle, said bus having a width at least equal to a number of bits in each of the instructions times a number of the instructions fetched in parallel,

The 749 patent is apparently the first time anyone coupled a CPU directly to a memory. And defining the width of the bus in the claim is sheer genius. How fast can a processor operate if there is no direct connection to memory? I don't think this one is easy to overcome with prior art, nor can it be worked around in modern chips or hidden from view. Hence, easy to determine infringement and in my opinion it is the killer. But offhand don't see any obvious connection the industries mentioned. ????

I'd be interested in what others think.

Opty