Current Defendants are fighting to convince the court, this round, that “primary memory” (a non-volatile entity) is RAM. Basically, limiting the use of one type Non-volatile memory-NOR under one use only.... even though SRAM, is specifically noted in the patent.

I can’t imagine the court entertaining that thought in placing a limitation to that only, with SRAM being a specific issue of the patent. The court has to identify with the SRAM to disqualify the defendant’s consideration.

In the CO case defendants convinced the court that the sole memory language of 774 claims 1 and 19, regarding flash memory entities, functioned without RAM. Putting a limitation on the patent to utilize one memory only ...NOR under one use only.

Amazing...lol

They are trying to limit the patent in the same fashion...explicit to NOR flash only...under one use only.

We've come a long way to come up against the same argument.

GLTL

doni