Below is a paste of EDIG's response to Samsung's counterclaims. Their probably all the same so to save a few bucks, I only downloaded these two.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
e.DIGITAL CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,
v.
AVID TECHNOLOGY, INC.; CASIO
AMERICA, INC.; LG ELECTRONICS USA,
INC.; NIKON, INC.; OLYMPUS AMERICA
INC.; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
AMERICA, INC.; and SANYO NORTH
AMERICA CORPORATION,
Defendants.

-------
C.A. No. 2:08-cv-93 DF
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
PLAINTIFF e.DITIGAL CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO
DEFENDANT SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.’S COUNTERCLAIMS
Now comes Plaintiff e.Digital Corporation (“e.Digital”) and states its Answer to the Counterclaims of Defendant Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“Samsung”) as follows:
THE PARTIES
1. e.Digital admits the allegations of Paragraph 1 of the Counterclaim.
2. e.Digital admits the allegations of Paragraph 2 of the Counterclaim.
3. e.Digital admits the allegations of Paragraph 3 of the Counterclaim.
4. e.Digital admits the allegations of Paragraph 4 of the Counterclaim.
5. e.Digital admits the allegations of Paragraph 5 of the Counterclaim.
6. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 6 of the Counterclaim.
7. e.Digital admits the allegations of Paragraph 7 of the Counterclaim but only to the extent that there is a controversy and not to any extent that the patents in suit are invalid or that Samsung has not infringed any claims of the patents in suit as alleged by Samsung. e.Digital denies that the patents in suit are invalid and denies that Samsung has not infringed any claims of the patents in suit.

-------
COUNT ONE
Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement and Invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 5,491,77
8. e.Digital repeats its responses to Paragraphs 1-7 of the Counterclaim.
9. e.Digital admits the allegations of Paragraph 9 of the Counterclaim.
10. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 10 of the Counterclaim.
11. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 11 of the Counterclaim.
12. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 12 of the Counterclaim.

-------
COUNT TWO
Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement and Invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 5,742,737
13. e.Digital repeats its responses to Paragraphs 1-7 of the Counterclaim.
14. e.Digital admits the allegations of Paragraph 14 of the Counterclaim.
15. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 15 of the Counterclaim.
16. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 16 of the Counterclaim.
17. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 17 of the Counterclaim.

-------
COUNT THREE
Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement and Invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 5,787,445
18. e.Digital repeats its responses to Paragraphs 1-7 of the Counterclaim.
19. e.Digital admits the allegations of Paragraph 19 of the Counterclaim.
20. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 20 of the Counterclaim.
21. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 21 of the Counterclaim.
22. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 22 of the Counterclaim.

-------
COUNT FOUR
Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement and Invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 5,839,108
23. e.Digital repeats its responses to Paragraphs 1-7 of the Counterclaim.
24. e.Digital admits the allegations of Paragraph 24 of the Counterclaim.
25. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 25 of the Counterclaim.
26. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 26 of the Counterclaim.
27. e.Digital denies the allegations of Paragraph 27 of the Counterclaim.

-------
REQUEST FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, e.Digital petitions this Court and requests that a judgment be entered and relief be granted as follows:
A. Declaring that Samsung has infringed the patents-in-suit (directly, by inducement, and/or contributorily);
B. A judgment dismissing with prejudice Samsung’s Counterclaims and each and every Prayer for Relief contained therein;
C. Awarding to Plaintiff e.Digital its costs; and
D. Awarding to Plaintiff e.Digital such other, further, or general relief as this Court may deem proper.

-------
Respectfully submitted,
Dated: June 4, 2008 By: /s/ Gary R Maze
Gary R. Maze
Lead Attorney
TX Bar 00792678
grmaze@duanemorris.com
Wesley W. Yuan
TX Bar 24042434
wwyuan@duanemorris.com
Duane Morris LLP
3200 Southwest Freeway, Suite 3150
Houston, TX 77027-7534
Tel.: 713.402.3900
Fax: 713.402.3901
4
DM1\1343925.1
L. Norwood Jameson
GA SBN: 003970
wjameson@duanemorris.com
Matthew S. Yungwirth
GA SBN: 783597
msyungwirth@duanemorris.com
Duane Morris LLP
1180 West Peachtree Street, Suite 700
Atlanta GA 30309-3448
Tel.: 404.253.6900
Fax.: 404.253.6901
Michael C. Smith
Tx. Bar 18650410
michaelsmith@siebman.com
Siebman, Reynolds, Burg, Phillips & Smith,
LLP – Marshall
713 South Washington Avenue
Marshall, Texas 75670
Tel.: 903.938.8900
Fax: 972.767.4620
OF COUNSEL:
Daniel C. Minteer (prospective pro hac vice)
CA SBN: 62158
dcminter@duanemorris.com
James Y.C. Sze (pro hac vice)
CA SBN: 203274
jsze@duanemorris.com
Douglas E. Olson (pro hac vice)
CA SBN: 38649
deolson@duanemorris.com
Heather U. Guerena (pro hac vice)
CA SBN: 238122
huguerena@duanemorris.com
Duane Morris LLP
101 W. Broadway, Suite 900
San Diego, CA 92101-8285
Tel.: 619.744.2200
Fax: 619.744.2201
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
E.DIGITAL CORPORATION
5
DM1\1343925.1
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned counsel hereby certifies that on June 4, 2008, a true and correct copy of
the foregoing PLAINTIFF e.DITIGAL CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.’S COUNTERCLAIMS was electronically
filed with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will automatically send
notification of such filing to all attorneys of record, and to all other attorneys of record not
receiving such notification via facsimile and/or e-mail.
/s/ Gary R Maze
Gary R. Maze