I don’t read these things for a living. Can you explain why the judge’s reasoning was incorrect with regard to the idea that the ‘774 patent was anticipated by the Schroeder patent (if ‘774 must use RAM for internal processing)?

Aside from not being happy with the ruling, it appears to me that it was nevertheless correct as given. If the judge had not effectively invalidated our patent on the grounds that it was anticipated and never should have been issued, then I think the defense would have put forth this same argument at or before trial. The judge basically saved them the hassle the way I read it.

- Sinkman