letgo...the petitioner is pushing from two different positions.

They want the board to consider, initially, a claim phrase challenge:” should be construed broader than “

""To the extent the Board concludes that “a logical link between the previous logical data segment and the new data segment” should be construed broader than “a pointer written to the previous logical data segment that points to the physical location of the new data segment,” such as with the district court’s claim construction, Krueger renders Claim 1 obvious. For example, should the term be construed to include any linkage of data segments, Krueger discloses that term.""

While at the same time want the board to consider a question not presented as a question: " For example, should the term be construed to include any linkage of data segments, Krueger discloses that term." basically saying, e.Digital cannot utilize pointers ...that is just right out preposterous.

Anyway...we wait on the statutory issue first....by LAW the petition should not be afforded a date.

doni