e.Digital

After considering the parties’ contentions and prosecution history, the Courtconcludes that neither the claims nor the intrinsic evidence clearly and unmistakablydisavow the use of file allocation tables or memory maps. See 3M Innovative Props.,18 725 F.3d at 1325. The ’445 patent specification, as e.Digital points out, discloses theuse of a memory block map as part of an embodiment of the invention. (See ’44520 patent at Figs. 5 and 6, 8:38-46, and 10:45-67.) In addition, the ’445 specificationdiscusses an embodiment using, among other things, “root directories,” an “index of22 segments,” and a “presentation map,” which might be considered by a person of

ordinary skill in the art to be analogous to a file allocation table or memory map. (See24 ’445 patent at 20:33-22:14 (referencing, inter alia, use of root directory, “nfsMkDir”and “nfsChDir” described as “Norris File System Directories,” “index of segments,”

and “presentation map”).) Therefore, the term cannot exclude memory maps.