"What will have to be proven is that they were not obvious. Your post did not adress obviousness. Go to the USPTO and look it up."

Here we go again.....I guess what you are saying is, the comparatives of status quo methodologies that are made in the patents are not in any way considered in showing an obvious difference or to be non-obvious.

There are multitudes of minerals and chemistry having and obvious consideration.....there are methodologies in mixing them that make the final consideration not obvious.

There are multitudes of electronic component....now reduced to IC considerations that are obvious.....there are methodologies in mixing them that make the final consideration not obvious.

The efforts of R/D for hardware / code issues it took to mold a serial consideration, as Norris and Daberko did, is not typical.

IMO, e.Digital is settling the 774 issues(micro-controller and cache schemes) under the scope of the whole patent portfolio. It's a serialized process in it's entirety and the micro-controller and cache issues, IMO, being element orchestrations considered in current settlements, would take the entirety of the portfolio to exhibit the non-obvious usage of them.

I'm actually here for what I considered non-obvious reasons, before it even became an issue.....I've always consider e.Digital as not typical, or I wouldn't be here.

I'm done here, where ever it goes...it goes.....

doni