THE COURT: No. Thank you.
At the beginning of today's hearing, I asked what
evidence the parties agreed that the Court should be
considering. I believe all of the exhibits that were
identified have been received, 1, 2, 3, 3A, B, C, and 4. I
asked which terms the parties desired the Court to construe in
hierarchy, and all the evidence and argument has pertained to
two terms: "flash memory" and "flash memory module which
1operates as sole memory of the received processed sound
1electrical signals and is capable of retaining recorded digital
information for storage in nonvolatile form."
Does that mean that none of the remaining terms that
were originally at issue need to be construed?
MR. JAMESON: Your Honor, from e.Digital's perspective --
THE COURT: Would you speak into the microphone.
MR. JAMESON: I'm sorry.
THE COURT: Thank you.
MR. JAMESON: Your Honor, e.Digital is willing to
proceed with the plain, ordinary meaning of the remainder of
the claim terms as would be understood by one of ordinary skill
in the art.
Obviously if the defendants disagree with that, then
the constructions that we have offered earlier are the
