"even if woody is bumped can the exhibt be brought in vi other means."

The US patent examiner should play a part in sorting this out.

IMO, they shouldn't be able to stop that from happening....

Though, the defendants might go the way of some form of dereliction of duty on her part.....I can see that shaping up.... wonder if shes following the case?

===============================

That aside....I find this interesting...

doc 298 defendants...

"MOTION TO PRECLUDE e.DIGITAL FROM RELYING UPON
THE DECLARATION OF INVENTOR ELWOOD NORRIS
FOR CLAIM CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES"

Their reason...

".Indeed, even today, individuals at the Defendant companies cannot review two of the exhibits to Mr. Norris’ declaration because they were, and still are designated “Highly Confidential -- Outside Counsel’s Eyes Only” pursuant to the Protective Order in this case. Neither e.Digital nor Mr. Norris has provided any contemporaneous documentation supporting Mr. Norris’ present-day recollections of an interview that occurred 15 years ago."

doc 296 plaintiff

8 Although e.Digital made Mr. Norris available for a deposition during claim construction discovery, Defendants chose not to depose Mr. Norris.

Seems defendants want to rely on this opening phrase of 298...

"The Federal Circuit has consistently held that an inventor’s testimony regarding the meaning of claim terms is irrelevant for purposes of claim construction."

They want Woodies current testimony sealed , yet they want past testimony read into the patent claims pretty much changing the name/headline of the patent.

Who wins this argument?

Is there a way to pre trial a patent before you apply for one?....lol

doni