I can't help but fault the judge for saying this revised claim construction was a "minor modification". Maybe to him but the argument starts all over and favors us. The defendants main argument in this new filing is that this new CC falls under the agreement of non-infringement and really is not substantiaed by science. We need to prove that this minor change is really a substative change to the CC and results affirmation of the basis of our main argumnet regarding the ring oscillator.

I can't help but think that the USPTO initial exam and the subsequent positive re-exams will have to be the main driver for us.