"My answer is , An intellectual property expert during Markman hearing as a consulting expert can evaluate the strength of the patents in question and assist the attorney in determining the best strategy for any license negotiations. This expert or experts will use various patent databases and patent files that detail the history of the patent prosecution to make a determination as to the validity of the patents, the likelihood of actual infringement, and suggest the strategy. "

Yes, but what does that have to do with the Markman and matters of law in allowing Woody to testify and show his exhibits?

With that, what does it have to do with the "matter of law" in allowing the collective defendants, pretty much challenging to rename the patent, with regard to memory issues?

This determining hearing will be but a couple of hrs in length....the judge will have already come to his judgement for the issues raised.

It's not about an IP expert .. I would hope that both parties know where they stand technically before the hearing.

It's about what a judge determins....i.e...the question over "the sole memory" as published in the patent.

e.Digital’s Proposed Construction...block erasable non-volatile memory

Defendants’ Proposed Construction : block erasable non-volatile memory that is the main memory of the system

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

e.Digital’s Proposed Construction: “a removable, interchangeable flash memory storage device that (1) is the only removable memory storage device that receives for storage the processed sound electrical signals, and (2) is capable of retaining for storage digital information without the need for ongoing power support”

Defendants’ Proposed Constructions13: (1) flash memory module: “a removable, interchangeable flash memory recording medium” and (2) sole memory of the received processed sound electrical signals: “the only memory of the received processed sound electrical signals, without another memory system such as RAM”

doni