JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION STATEMENT [by Defendants]

Pursuant to the Court’s Scheduling Order for Markman Issues, the Parties hereby submit
this Joint Claim Construction Statement.

1. Reservation of Rights by Plaintiff e.Digital Corporation

As set forth in its Initial Disclosures, e.Digital currently asserts against each Defendant
claims 1, 2, 3, 18 and 19 of the ‘774 Patent and claim 5 of the ‘737 Patent. Additionally,
e.Digital anticipates that discovery from Defendants will show that their accused products also infringe claims 4, 6 and/or 7 of the ‘737 Patent. Accordingly, e.Digital reserves the right to assert these additional claims following Defendants’ production of sufficiently detailed technical documents sufficient to show the detailed designs, architecture, components and operations of the accused products. To date, some of the Defendants have not produced such documents and instead have only produced documents such as user’s manuals that are not sufficiently detailed, no product documents at all.

2. Defendants’ Response to Plaintiff’s “Reservation of Rights”

Defendants object to Plaintiff’s “reservation of rights” to assert additional claims against
any of the Defendants after April 7, 2010, which was the deadline for Plaintiff to assert any additional claims or patents. (Dkt. No. 277, Scheduling Order for Markman Issues, § 6(f)(a).) Plaintiff did not identify any additional claims by April 7, 2010, and therefore cannot assert additional claims or patents against any of the Defendants. Moreover, Defendants object to any implication that they have not produced appropriate documentation as required by the Scheduling Order for Markman Issues. Although Defendants produced their initial round of documents on April 7, 2010, and produced their second round of documents on April 30, 2010, Plaintiff has informed just one of the 28 Defendants that Plaintiff believes its document production is insufficient. Therefore, Plaintiff’s implication that Defendants have not produced sufficient documents to allow Plaintiff to determine which claims to assert is inappropriate.

3. Proposed Constructions

Subject to e.Digital’s foregoing objection and Defendants’ response thereto, the parties
identify in Exhibit A hereto the claim terms, phrases and clauses that one or more of the parties propose to have construed. Exhibit A also identifies for each such claim term, phrase or clause an identification of all references from the intrinsic record and any extrinsic evidence known to the party on which it may rely to support its proposed claim construction. In accordance with the Scheduling Order for Markman Issues, the parties have served any expert report(s), in accordance with Rule 26(a)(2), for any expert(s) who may testify at the Markman hearing, along with a detailed summary of any testimony by any fact witness who will be offering testimony at the Markman hearing. The parties reserve their rights to identify rebuttal expert testimony, if necessary to respond to any expert testimony offered by another party.

4. Proposed Length of Markman Hearing

e.Digital contends that the Markman hearing will take no longer than 3 hours.
Defendants contend that the Markman hearing will take approximately one day, depending on the amount (if any) of live testimony.