I'm throwing it out there to see if anyone can find the post that I think he made. At this point, unless you have microprocessor design experience and you have a block diagram of all the accused products, statements like USPTO reexaminations are meaningless. I could go on for an hour but you'll just have to trust me. It could come down to scope of infringement instead of black or white infringement. This has become super technical with Phase Locked Loops and the "control" oscillators therein. Is a voltage controlled ring oscillator within a phase locked loop(PLL) first and foremost a ring oscillator? Is the external crystal clock that provides signals into the PLL being used as a reference signal within the PLL? Or is the voltage controlled ring oscillator relying on the external crystal clock to have the voltage parameters changed into the voltage controlled ring oscillator? In this case the voltage which could be connected to one or many of the inverters of the "ring oscillator" may not be what was intended by what was originally represented for voltage in the Process, Voltage and Temperature (PVT) variability in the 336. The thing that I have the hardest time reconciling is the Markman at the ITC was essentially the same to the Eastern District of Texas about 6 years ago. We folded against the J3 and you have statements from the BOD that said "you had your chance," but then you have 50 to 75 licenses granted since the J3 settlement. The issue there was the 50 to 75 licenses were nuisance value and were probably the cost of legal representation for the big companies. USPTO was not about the term "entire," it was about the ring oscillator. Short of seeing the block diagrams of the accused chips, it is impossible to say what is happening. I'm also still having a tough time understanding why both parties agreed on the "entire" term in front of Judge Ware that the phrase meant does "not directly rely on a crystal clock genrator or command input," so we were fine with it in Cali but not at the ITC. No one from this board should be answering the technical questions above. If someone gets what I'm saying here please PM me to avoid speculating on technical issues on the board.
