Here are the winning claim constructions according to our own legal counsel (Jim Otteson from Agility), which is from filing 509113 (Complainants' Motion in Limine to Exclude Testimony Argument and Evidence Relating to Certain Anticipation and Obviousness Arguments for Certain Claims as Disclosed in Exhibit S of Respondents PreHearing Brief ) .

Please remember quantity is not better than quality in this respect.

Ghost, the claim construction you are referring to in your prior post was lost to the big companies, which is the last claim construction below.

Table 2: ALJ’s Adopted Claim Constructions

Disputed Claim Terms (Underlined) </> Claim # </> WINNER (Parties proposed construction adopted)

ring oscillator </> 1, 9, 11, 15 </> Winner: None (but this is closer to ours than the Big Companies)

an entire ring oscillator variable speed system clock in said single integrated circuit </> 1,11 </> Respondents

an entire oscillator disposed upon said integrated circuit substrate </> 6, 13 </> Respondents

an entire variable speed clock disposed upon said integrated circuit substrate </> 10, 16 </> Respondents

clocking said central processing unit </> 1, 6, 10, 11, 13, 16 </> Complainants

thereby enabling said processing frequency to track said clock rate in response to said parameter variation </> 6, 13 </> Complainants

varying together </>1, 11 </> Complainants

varying in the same way </> 10, 16 </> Complainants

varying . . . in the same way </>6, 13 </> Complainants

wherein said central processing unit operates asynchronously to said input/output interface </>11, 13, 16</> Respondents