"An oscillator is a circuit that generates timing signals (Oklobdzija Decl., ¶ 6-7), and since the oscillator’s output is used “as a timing reference for the CPU” (id.), it meets the relevant “variable speed clock” requirements. Barco’s accused products utilize a phase-locked loop (or “PLL”), which, as explained below, is a circuit that, when locked, manages the variation of on-chip oscillators. Therefore, the presence of a PLL confirms both the presence of the on-chip oscillator, and its variable nature. 5 Barco’s Motion disregards the critical step of claim construction, as if it makes no difference for purposes of this Motion. But Barco is wrong, because the Court cannot properly consider the suitability of the evidence of infringement without having the claim’s scope and meaning determined. See Wenger, 239 F. 3d at 1231. Although Judge Ward previously construed some of these claim terms in the Texas litigation, Barco did not stipulate to all of Judge Ward’s constructions, as indicated by the Joint Claims Construction Statement filed by the parties in this matter. This is at odds with Barco’s statement that “there is no need for the Court to construe the claims before granting summary judgment of noninfringement.” Barco Mot. at 3:14-15."

I guess the sky isn't falling yet...But I'm sure some will protest that it is.....