D. The District Courts Collateral Estoppel Decision is Premature

Quote: My notes are listed below in this quote....

In my opinion, Handal should have the right to a formal claim construction and the collateral estoppel decision was premature.

As a corollary, courts considering intervening rights issues have consistently held that a finding whether claims are identical after reexamination should not occur until a formal claim construction... The district court effectively engaged in a de facto claim construction within the context of the motion dealing with narrower issue of collateral estoppel.

e.Digital's re-exam Patent 774 with the new and amended claims has NOT been through a claim construction. e.Digital was not allowed to file claim construction briefs, offer expert witness testimony, or participate in a full and fair hearing to present all relevant evidence and arguments regarding the impact of the amended claims and the re-examination history of the proper construction of the phrase"sole memory of the received process sound signals"


Listed below is a copy taken from the section D. The District Courts Collateral Estoppel Decision is Premature

SUMMARY OF REPLY Document 27 (26 pages):
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bx9NLDCScshnSk5WSVdGNVUteTg/edit?usp=sharing