"...the 774 was sacrificed with significant changes for those reasons....so that 737 can kick in..."
Thing is, they(Gurries) fought hard to preserve 774 existing claim terms. His comments and details went to great length to inform the examiner that "power source coupled to...etc" should remain as is. He submitted twice his considerations...up to the final, final rejection to no way convince the examiner.
With that, 774 then significantly changed and evolved to what it is now.....different.
1. If you have read the CE issues of the defendants,
2. considered if the USPTO examiner had gone along with Gurries considerations....
3. we may have found ourselves to be in a bit of a pickle at this moment.... if you have read the response by Handal.
Yet another serendipitous unfolding of the life of e.Digital...IMO.
You have to read the defendants and the plaintiffs pleadings...along with following closely the re-exam issues to understand what I'm getting at here.
doni
