I cannot agree with your premise. First of all what would be Pat Nunnally's reason for searching for and identifying 174 companies who might be infringing on EDig's IP by INITIALLY STARTING with those companies whose patents refer to EDig's patents.

According to your reasoning that means nothing. If I understand you it's common standard practice for all companies to refer to other patents when filing for their own patent. Then why would PN use that a starting point to find EDig infringers if it meant nothing.??? If it means nothing then he would find nothing.....at least that makes common sense to me.

However, RP, when asked by yours truly as to how these IP infringers were identified, stated just that....."Look for company patents that refer to EDig patents" "when you find one examine the referring patent."

Now I am sure there is much more to it than that but that is where it all began. That has to mean something.

Also you seem to imply the company who references EDig's patent does it as a matter of course without really knowing what EDig's patent states. If I am wrong in my assumption please correct me but it does seem to me that a company who references EDig's patent WOULD HAVE TO KNOW WHAT IT IS THEY ARE REFERENCING. Therefore knowing, would have to know if the patent they are applying for INCLUDES ANY EDig's IP.

I have been rolling this around in my "little grey cells" since you answered my original post on this subject. If the company refers to EDig's patent and INCLUDES any of EDig's tech then common sense HAS TO SAY that it is doing so WILLINGLY.

I cannot come to any other conclusion.....Of course look who is talking...me..