I'm no lawyer but Edig never sued Apple based on #108. It sued on these three: 5,742,737: “Method for recording voice messages on flash memory in a hand held recorder” by Daberko et. al. and assigned to Norris Communications Corporation. Prosecuted by Thorpe, North & Western, LLP. Includes 12 claims (5 indep.). Was application 08/810,210. Filed 3/3/1997 & Granted 4/21/1998. 5,491,774: “Handheld record and playback device with flash memory” by Norris et. al. and assigned to Comp General Corporation. Prosecuted by Thorpe, North & Western. Includes 22 claims (2 indep.). Was application 08/229,731. Filed 4/19/1994 & Granted 2/13/1996. 5,842,170: “Method for editing in hand held recorder” by Daberko et. al. and assigned to Norris Communications Corp.. Prosecuted by Thorpe, North & Western LLP. Includes 13 claims (2 indep.). Was application 08/772,378. Filed 12/23/1996 & Granted 11/24/1998. Apple lumped 108 into the 774 and claimed collateral estoppel. Edig won the appeal that 108 is a separate patent and that collateral estoppel should never have been applied. Later Edig won all 12 of the claims construction items. So now Edig can go after Apple and others with the solid #108. Please correct me anyone if I am wrong.