That's good news. I'm sure tony Handal is on top of it and will be careful not to antagonize the judge. My main point is that we need to make absolutely clear to judge and jury how absolutely wrong the CO ruling was.
If we keep focussed on the actual patent, and its original embodiment in the Flashback device, paying careful attention to the diagram and the actual wording of both the original and the reexamined patent (as well as Woody's testimony), judge and jury should be able to see that RAM is the working memory used in processing the sound. Flash is storage memory, of the received, processed sound.
Thus, the whole "sole memory limitiation" thing is a vague phrase that does not appear in the patent but is being used by the defense to obscure and misrepresent the actual facts.
Maybe a really effective PowerPoint presentation would help?
