Free
Message: Re: 2-13-14
12
Feb 10, 2015 08:26AM
3
Feb 10, 2015 09:04AM
15
Feb 10, 2015 09:12AM
1
vic
Feb 10, 2015 10:49AM
10
Feb 10, 2015 03:14PM
5
Feb 10, 2015 03:22PM
6
Feb 10, 2015 03:24PM
8
Feb 10, 2015 03:31PM
4
Feb 10, 2015 03:32PM
9
Feb 10, 2015 03:43PM

Feb 10, 2015 03:46PM
1
vic
Feb 10, 2015 06:04PM
5
Feb 10, 2015 06:21PM
1
Feb 10, 2015 06:24PM
2
Feb 10, 2015 06:26PM
6
Feb 10, 2015 07:25PM
12
Feb 11, 2015 07:46AM

jefother...there are a specific set of devices involved for the SNDK case. Dismissing 774(claimss 33 and 34), as it related to those devices, IMO does not precluded other issues from being litigated.

e.Digital has decided to drop 774(claims 33 and 34) against those issues....that said, 774(for claims 33 and 34) now stand under a new light subsequent the appeal process....as not being able to be re-litigated.

A lot has changed since the SNDK dismissal. SNDK does not have to worry about 774(claims 33 and 34) any more, in regard to its related counter claims...

SNDK now has to worry about 108 (claims 1 through 6) in relation to 774(claims 33 and 34)

With that, 108 can be litigated against the same device issues if e.Digital wants to....along with others beyond those, if it wants to.

fwiw

doni

10
Feb 12, 2015 11:00AM
1
Feb 12, 2015 11:20AM
11
Feb 12, 2015 11:27AM
4
Feb 12, 2015 11:44AM
8
Feb 12, 2015 11:54AM
10
Feb 12, 2015 12:08PM
1
Feb 12, 2015 12:17PM
5
Feb 12, 2015 12:21PM
9
Feb 12, 2015 12:25PM
2
Feb 12, 2015 12:36PM
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply