"I do not remember specifically the Judge or Micron saying "inequitable conduct" defense was dropped but perhaps that is part of dropping the amended complaint, which by the way was dropped "without prejudice" (per Judge Huff)."

Micron can revist the issue, if they wish, but not with the courts current case agenda. This issue is more determind on the timing in bringing these new discovery issues into the case.

e.Digitals arguement is that they had plenty of time to get their effort off the ground and they choose not to early on. Now that they wish to, it leaves e.Digital at a dis advantage becasue of the stage of the case.

"In any case the Judge ruled against Micron and denied it's request for the amended complaint. In fact no delay was granted to either side, EDig's stay or Micron's stay. However Micron threw in a brand new (through it up against the wall to see what sticks) complaint of "INTENT" "

"inequitable conduct" = "with the specific intent to deceive the PTO"

PLAINTIFF E.DIGITAL CORPORATION’S MEMORANDUM OF POINTS

AND AUTHORITIES SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ITS OPPOSITION TO

MICRON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION SEEKING MODIFICATION OF

THE CONSOLIDATED SCHEDULING ORDER AND FOR LEAVE TO AMEND

ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIMS

LINK

doni