<Conversely, if the court accepts that a variable speed clock is necessary for infringement to occur, and that the Barco devices do not contain such a clock, the motion should, in theory, be granted.>

To do so, the court would necessarily have to decide the construction of "variable speed clock."

IMO, the whole purpose of this is to get TPL to state what clocks might be included in that category of "variable speed clock." And they want to know this before the Markman, for good reason.

Opty