Free
Message: Re: PACER..Dischino..Cra... No../HATARI
15
Sep 12, 2011 09:10PM
4
Sep 12, 2011 09:17PM
1
Sep 12, 2011 10:50PM
4
Sep 12, 2011 10:55PM
2
Sep 12, 2011 11:04PM
11
Sep 12, 2011 11:18PM
9
Sep 13, 2011 02:11AM
5
Sep 13, 2011 05:06AM
5
Sep 13, 2011 09:39AM
1
Sep 13, 2011 10:23AM
3
Sep 13, 2011 10:38AM
6
Sep 13, 2011 10:52AM
4
Sep 13, 2011 11:11AM
6
Sep 13, 2011 04:17PM
13
Sep 13, 2011 07:39PM
2
Sep 13, 2011 08:10PM
6
Sep 13, 2011 11:14PM
4
Sep 13, 2011 11:32PM
4
Sep 14, 2011 12:45AM
3
Sep 14, 2011 08:56AM
4
Sep 14, 2011 10:01AM
4
Sep 14, 2011 10:47AM
7
Sep 14, 2011 10:54AM

"Does that not indicate, while more narrow the interpretation, it is still in play"

It indicates that their proposed was not considered.......lol

That considered....

RE: 8K..."The Opinion construes claim terms in United States Patent 5,491,774 , one of the Company’s Flash-R patents, more narrowly than proposed by the Company. The Company is evaluating with counsel the impact of the opinion on the litigation."

There does not seem to be a problem with the underlined...separate the issues, because there is a proposed and a published consideration that they have to allow comments to cover.

doni

4
Sep 16, 2011 12:43PM
3
Sep 16, 2011 12:53PM
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply