"so overturning that ruling may not be so distasteful for the appeals court "

I don't think its going there...what I get from reading the CE ruling...in a nut shell..

e.Digital is trying to get the judge to identify with amendments to 774 that e.Digital made of its own accord regarding the RAM issue as it relates to the sole memory issue ruled in Colorado.

The judge is saying,,,,,.paraphrase "no, no, no, not going there .. as the re-exam was not initially tailored around the Markman ruling in CO...it was tailored around something entirely different....control circuitry issues."

With that, the judge did not identify with what e.Digital had in mind to off set the CO ruling...even with e.Digital entering 108 for supporting explanations . The judge made his ruling based on not recognizing the re-exam issues....or 108.

That non recognition by the judge, regarding the re-exam, IMO, is the big question of appeal.

doni