With that, a focus of the CE judge was the fact, that the re-exam was not directly about the sole memory issue raised in Colorado ruling, but control circuitry issues.

The bulk of the re- exam was over control circuitry issues that defendants of the Colorado cases raised. For that issue, a Colorado defendant initiated the re-exam...not e.Digital.

However, once indicated by the Colorado defendant, e.Digital was at liberty to rectify the sole memory issue, as well as, the control circuitry issue .....And to both, they did rectify.

The SC judge is leaning on the fact that the sole memory issue was not the cause of the re-exam, with that, he ruled as he did.

Is that just?

IMVHO, it’s not, as e.Digital did not initiate the re-exam of 774 and did not dictate the path of the re-exam..

doni