e.Digital

Flash-R™ patent portfolio e.Digital's Flash-R™ patent portfolio contains fundamental technology essential to the utilization of flash memory in today's large and growing portable electronic products market.

Home Videos Research Press Release Q&A Discussion

Threads Posts

I wonder if our opponents are relying...

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: I wonder if our opponents are relying...

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: I wonder if our opponents are relying...thanks Doni

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: I wonder if our opponents are relying...thanks Doni

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: I wonder if our opponents are relying...thanks Doni

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: I wonder if our opponents are relying...

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Pacer - Dropcam & Oco camera are related cases

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: I wonder if our opponents are relying...thanks Doni

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: I wonder if our opponents are relying...thanks Doni

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

USPTO Taps Ex-Micron Patent Exec As 2nd-In-Command !!

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Is Micron Technology Inc. and Intel Corporation’s New 3D Memory a Game Changer?

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: USPTO Taps Ex-Micron Patent Exec As 2nd-In-Command !!

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: USPTO Taps Ex-Micron Patent Exec As 2nd-In-Command !!

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: USPTO Taps Ex-Micron Patent Exec As 2nd-In-Command !!

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: Is Micron Technology Inc. and Intel Corporation’s New 3D Memory a Game Changer?

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Re: USPTO Taps Ex-Micron Patent Exec As 2nd-In-Command !!

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

Micron admits claim 1 got more broad definition by claim construction than usual

e.Digital

over 9 years ago

in response to doni's message

C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3): Claim Construction
Claim 1 must be given its “broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b). Petitioners refer to this standard as “BRI.”2
To determine the meaning of Claim 1, it is appropriate and necessary to consider the ’108 patent as well as the specification and prosecution history of its parent—U.S. Patent No. 5,787,445 (the “’445 patent”) (Ex. 1008)—to which the ’108 patent is a continuation-in-part.3 See, e.g., Omega Eng’g, Inc., v. Raytek
The district court in e.Digital Corp. v. Other World Computing, Inc., No. 3:13-cv-02915 (S.D. Cal.); and e.Digital Corp. v. Mushkin, Inc., No. 3:13-cv-02914 (S.D. Cal.) rendered a claim construction decision broader than the BRI advocated in this petition. (Ex. 1016.) While Petitioners do not agree with its merits, they attach it to this petition in the interest of full disclosure.