Free
Message: Re: 8K Out...Narrowing the scope
14
Jun 29, 2011 05:40PM
1
Jun 29, 2011 05:49PM
10
Jun 29, 2011 06:37PM
6
Jun 29, 2011 07:43PM
8
Jun 29, 2011 08:32PM
15
Jun 29, 2011 10:50PM
11
Jun 29, 2011 11:22PM

Thanks for this, Doni.

Also, the order states, Page 4, footnote, that the device can work in a purely analog fashion referencing claim 19 of the patent for support. However, claim 19 states: "recording medium which is capable of retaining recorded digital information for storage". Namely, "DIGITAL". Clearly, the court got this interpretation wrong.

I think this "error" is important as the order is focused in distinguishing "partially processed sound" from "fully processed sound".

Also, on Page 6, the order writes:

"He [Norris] indicated that, by amending Claim 1 to state that "the invention [includes] flash memory as the sole memory to store the received processed sound electrical signal," it would overcome "any prior art teaching which uses flash memory without another memory system such as RAM."

So, if I read this right, Norris wrote that his invention overcomes prior art having flash memory without RAM!

On page 10, the order makes a very odd argument about references to the word "processing" or "processed" in the patent, noting the "absence" of the word processed to support the courts argument. This is really a weak argument. Clearly, flash memory stores the "fully processed sound." The order is also claiming that the flash memory can "store" the analog data. How does it do that?! I am wrong to believe that flash memory can only store digital data?

-dy2147

7
Jun 30, 2011 12:58AM
23
Jul 02, 2011 11:54PM
10
Jul 03, 2011 11:34AM
11
Jul 03, 2011 01:23PM
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply