New filing today. I have to say these guys all look very serious and determined about going to a Markman Hearing next February. I've pasted Doc 160 below but will also upload the PDF file to box.net. Also will upload Exhibits A and B of Doc 160. doni, I think you especially will enjoy reading Exhibit A. Exhibit B is the resume of an expert Samsung may call to testify at the Markman.
|
Date Filed
|
#
|
Docket Text
|
|
06/19/2009
|
160
|
NOTICE by Samsung Electronics America, Inc., E.Digital Corporation PR 4-3 Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Jones, Michael) (Entered: 06/19/2009)
|
JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PREHEARING STATEMENT
Pursuant to Patent Rule 4-3 and in accordance with the Court’s Docket Control Order (Doc. No. 102), Plaintiff e.Digital Corporation (“e.Digital”) and Defendant Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“Samsung”) hereby jointly serve this Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement.
(a) Identification of Claim Terms, Phrases or Clauses on which the Parties Agree:
The parties have reached an agreement regarding the proposed constructions for the following claim phrases:
|
Phrase
|
Claims in which terms are present
|
Agreed Proposed Construction
|
|
“removable,
interchangeable”
|
‘774 Patent, Cls. 1 & 19
|
“capable of being removed from one device and readily transferred to another similar device”
|
|
“multifunctional switch
assembly”
|
‘737 Patent, Cls. 1 & 3
|
“a switch assembly that allows the user to activate multiple functional operations”
|
(b) Identification of Proposed Constructions of Disputed Claim Terms, Phrases or Clauses:
Exhibit A hereto sets forth: (1) the claim terms, phrases and clauses that the parties agree should be construed; (2) the claim terms, phrases and clauses that only e.Digital contends should be construed; and (3) the claim terms, phrases and clauses that only Samsung contends should be construed. Exhibit A also identifies for each such claim term, phrase and clause an identification of all references from the specification or prosecution history that support that construction, and an identification of any extrinsic evidence known to the party on which it intends to rely either to support its proposed construction of the claim or to oppose any other party’s proposed construction of the claim, including, but not limited to, as permitted by law, dictionary definitions, citations to learned treatises and prior art, and testimony of percipient and expert witnesses.
(c) Length of Markman Hearing:
The parties anticipate that they will need no more than 3 hours for the claim construction hearing.
(d) Identification of Witnesses for Claim Construction Hearing:
e.Digital does not intend to call any witnesses for the claim construction hearing.
Samsung may submit written testimony from and potentially call Joseph C. McAlexander as an expert witness at the Claim Construction Hearing. Mr. McAlexander may offer testimony regarding the technology of the patents-in-suit, the level of ordinary skill in the relevant art, and the meaning of the disputed claim terms and phrases to one of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time. Mr. McAlexander may also offer testimony on the prosecution histories of the patents-in-suit, or the prior art cited therein, or how those materials would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. Mr. McAlexander may also offer testimony to rebut extrinsic evidence offered by e.Digital. Mr. McAlexander’s testimony may include, but is not limited to, testimony regarding how the two patents-in-suit are directed to hand-held voice recording devices that record audio signals on flash memory without using another memory system such as RAM. His testimony may concern voice recording and playback devices, nonvolatile computer chip memory, solid state devices, and related topics. A copy of Mr. McAlexander’s curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit B.
(e) Identification of Other Issues to be Addressed at Claim Construction Hearing:
The parties do not believe that there are any other issues to be addressed at the claim construction hearing that is currently set for 9:00am on February 17, 2010.
Jointly and respectfully submitted this 19th day of June 2009.
/s/ Matthew S. Yungwirth, with
permission by Michael E. Jones
L. Norwood Jameson
Matthew S. Yungwirth
Duane Morris LLP
1180 West Peachtree St., # 700
Atlanta GA 30309-3448
Tel: 404.253.6900
Fax: 404.253.6901
wjameson@duanemorris.com
msyungwirth@duanemorris.com
Gary R. Maze
Wesley W. Yuan
Duane Morris LLP
3200 Southwest Freeway
Ste 3150
Houston, TX 77027-7534
Tel.: 713.402.3900
Fax: 713.402.3901
grmaze@duanemorris.com
wwyuan@duanemorris.com
Michael C. Smith
Siebman, Reynolds, Burg, Phillips &
Smith, LLP – Marshall
/s/ Michael Jones
Gregory S. Arovas
Todd M. Friedman
Christopher M. Gerson
Kirkland & Ellis, LLP
153 E 53rd St
Citicorp Center
New York, NY 10022-4675
Tel: 212-446-4766
Fax: 212-446-4900
garovas@kirkland.com
tfriedman@kirkland.com
cgerson@kirkland.com
Allen Franklin Gardner
Michael Edwin Jones
Potter Minton PC
110 N College
Suite 500
PO Box 359
Tyler, TX 75710-0359
Tel: 903-597-8311
allengardner@potterminton.com
mikejones@potterminton.com
Attorneys for Defendant
4
713 South Washington Avenue
Marshall, Texas 75670
Tel.: 903.938.8900
Fax: 972.767.4620
michaelsmith@siebman.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
e.Digital Corporation
Samsung Electronics America, Inc
