Re: Day (124) might be the day???
posted on
Jun 02, 2011 11:45AM
From page 192 of Markman transcript:
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
constructions that we think are the right constructions of those claim terms.