we are unsure about what you said about the "all or nothing" (as ease put it) aproach to the claims at issue.

If one or two elements of a claim has confused the court enough to lean toward the defendents way of thinking........are you saying that,that would be enought to win the entire CC and even though all the other elements and claims are a slam dunk, invalidate the patent at issue?

Say for example, that a patent holder at a cc has a microchip that by design works and has a working result of certian aspects(say two elements put together that work together and get the desired result,eventhough the two halfs may "walk at different speeds". Now at a CC a defendent that has a chip that does that exact same thing presents the court with the fact that the defendents chip is used for something different than what the plaintiff's origanal patent "specifically states" and by the way our chip has a right angle bend in it , and that makes the surface area of the circuit board part of the chip different in the actual design. And of course we color ours orange, use more slicon, add several unused circuits, so we should be let off the hook because ours if obviously different.

The plaintiff's arguement is that no matter how the chip is specifically used that it is still getting the same results (doing the same basic work) by design of the plaintiff's patents, no matter how much you try and add to it and modify it (trying to work around the patent)

Now, form what I assume, we are talking about "an ordinary person's of skills perception " at the time of the patent. Where is the line drawn?That would be the good question to ask, would it not? Would the 10 speed bicyle patent holder make all the money on all 10 speeds being sold, or would the holder of the basic bicycle patent have any rights, eventhough someone added some sprockets to allow gear reduction. I would think the bicycle holder would get his due, but have to pay the 10 speed guy if that part is used on the bike, and in kind the 10 speed guy would be allowed to sell bicycles as well but have to pay the bicycle holder (more that the other way around) money for the basic bike design.

Is it not that simple? Would the KSR not really work out to that same result, it being obvious that it is a bicycle,or a high speed, low power, micro chip design.......

What say you?

And again thanks.