"but Fed Appelate said different"

No it didn't...the CO claims construction ruling got it wrong and said different....had it been right..''infrienge one infrienge all.'' would have stood.

The appeal got it right, with regard to the patent status of each patent ...''infrienge one infrienge all.'' does not mean the patents have to be bound to each other.

This board, myself anyway, knew that the patents were separate issues way before it was ruled into the CE issue.....the outrage of 108 being tied to the CE was noted on this board immediately after the ruling.

Freds comment was spot on.

doni