"Accordingly, the Court concludes that the proper construction of the phrase “a flash memory module which operates as sole memory of the received processed sound electrical signals” is best addressed in two parts.

[1]The phrase “received processed sound electrical signals” refers to the electrical signals that have been generated by the microphone and passed through the amplifier and gain control circuits, but have yet to be converted by the CODEC.

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

but have yet to be converted .... I take that to mean that the Analog to Digital convertions (AD)... are not completed, or are not considered as a function of the "received processed sound signals"

The descriptive word "received" indicates a detail of only one digital function AD, or an analog to digital conversion process normally sampled/processed prior to being digitally signature and then sent along for a write to storage. A process requiring an overwrite RAM resource for administering a constant sampling.

That said, there are two functions that have to be dealt with.....The other is DA or a digital to analog conversion on play back .....this function is not considered in any of the construction considerations....as received indicates one direction.

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

[2]The remainder of the disputed language[a flash memory module which operates as sole memory of the] requires that the device use only flash memory, not RAM or any other memory system, while engaging the CODEC, DSP (as applicable), and memory control functions, as well as storing the fully-manipulated data."

What is considered here , the balance of processing the analog signal AD and DA / compression .... is taking place within the flash through some kind of back and fourth orchestration between the DSP and the flash....(as applicable)...

Flash is not an overwrite memory for processing analog to digital signals....and to do, if possible, as being considered would be slow and wear the memory out prematurely.

Using it in that fashion would void the warranty.....lol

The flash is for storage only as e.Digital has fashioned its claims construction.

I have no idea what was presented to the judge by the defendants....

As to your direct question...

"Will you please explain how this construction differs from Nunlly's often repeated statement that , "If you pull the FLASH CARD and it does not work, it infringes on our patents?..."

e.Digital does not utilize the flash to administer processing environment....neither do any of the defendants.... ASK them and them ask them why not when they say no.

I gave a short explanation here this am...i don't feel like typing it out again

Re: Okay here's my two cents...

doni