Free
AGORACOM NEWS FLASH

Dear Agoracom Family,

I want to thank all of you for your patience with us over the past 48 hours and apologize for what was admittedly a botched launch of our new site.

As you can see, we have reverted back to the previous version of the site while we address multiple forum functionality flaws that inexplicably made their way into the launch.

To this end:

1.We have identified 8 fundamental but easily fixable flaws that will be corrected in the coming week, so that you can continue to use the forums exactly as you've been accustomed to.

2.Additionally we will also be implementing a couple of design improvements to "tighten up" the look and feel of the forums.

Sincerely,

George et al

Message: The Judge has already made a decision in his mind

and then there's

5. How, on yet another front involving the Colorado case/defendants...took place the arguing over issues of claim construction language un-related to the sole memory claims construction issue...An argument regarding language over control circuitry issues and how circuit board periphery device components are powered on and off....which lead to a re-exam in that regard…by one of the defendants. The SC/CE judge focused on this re-exam and its initial intent and disregarded the full and final re-exam.

How does Handal explain all that, as, IMO, its important to have a complete understanding when having to rule over a previous courts findings..

This is one f’n maze…

doni

Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply