"Norris adds one more device to this array of products using CompactFlash to store and interchange data."

The Company intends to license their patented technology to other organizations interested in combining together to build a market for removable Flash memory module applications which will allow people a universal format for storing and moving data of any type. The Norris Flash File System, a proprietary system created to transparently store and manipulate all types of data on Flash memory, is also available under licensing parameters set by the Company"

The key word in the first paragraph quoted above is device. In the second paragraph, it is also.

Why? Because the 774 patent covers a specific device. The file management system (now known as MicroOS) is covered by a different patent and is not relevant to this patent. Notice how this all gets tangled up in the following from IHUB:

"At the time the patent was granted it was viewed as a BROAD patent covering flash memory recording the problem was there was no market to sue for infringement. Apple had how many I-phones for sale then? So does the patent cover the BROAD category or just using flash memory with some Micro-OS (Norris) flash file management system everybody just engineered around in a device with no RAM."

The patent doesn't require that Micro OS be used. The defense may argue that they have "engineered around" Micro OS, but that would be irrelevant to this patent. It would be taken up in detail when we sue the them for infringing on Micro OS — not here.

In determining the issue of infringement here, we look at the plain language of the patent, the accompanying diagrams, and the Flashback device.

So the real question remaining is: Does the patented device transmit sound directly from the signal processing circuitry to flash — bypassing the A/D conversion, memory circuitry, and control logic (as the Markman opinion says) — or are A/D conversion, memory circuitry, and control logic employed before the data is stored in flash (as Figure 1 appears to suggest).

If the A/D conversion, memory circuitry, and control logic are not used for processing the sound, why are they represented on the diagram? If there is any doubt, why can't we examine the actual Flashback, which is the embodiment of the patent, and see beyond a doubt what's going on?