I am not a techie as you all know and believe me the sh*t Micron attys threw at the judge was completely foreign to me. After a bit the theme of their presentation became very evident.....they were just trying to change the definition of "primary memory" and its relationship with "Flash Memory and "cache memory"...... with the secondary point of data (Im not sure about whether it was data or ???)having "DIRECT ACCESS" to primary memory without the need of flash or cache... They kept trying to say Flash was not Primary Memory therefore Primary Memory was not Flash...

However the judge asked them a question, "Can Flash Memory be Primary Memory at times"?? Of course the answer was "yes it can"..That shot that argument down and in fact later of under other questions from the judge they admitted that primary and flash were in fact interchangeable.

Also the judge asked Micron, who dominated the time, (1 1/2 hour total with Mr Handal only using about 20 minutes) "What is the reason for you saying that "direct access" is necessary to the primary memory when it either goes to Flash or Cache first then to primary memory now". In other words the same purpose is achieved with or without "direct access" so why do you think it changes the definition of the Claim to change the meaning of the patent?

Also, when Micron went on and on, and believe they did, about a certain definition in the claim the judge stopped the atty and asked "Do you mean this'? and he replied with downright garbage and she stopped him in mid sentence and said, "I think the plaintiff has the better side of that argument".

In almost every case the judge queried Micron as to why this and why that and the answers he gave were gibberish, at least to my mind.

I got the impression every statement he made was to change the subject, find something, ANYTHING, minor he could find in an attempt to change the BIG PICTURE.

Almost in mind, (forgive me here for a dumb example) as if a man was caught on national television and seen by dozens of passers by, murdering ten people and caught with the weapon in his hand, yet set free because he wasn't given his Miranda Rights properly. Micron was trying to claim the Miranda rights arguement.

What Micron was arguing, from what I heard and semi-understood, had no relationship to 108 or any of it's claims but rather (as Bill Clinton said, "That depends of what the meaning of IS is"

I talked to Handal on the elevator and made the comment that I felt the judge was leaning towards the arguments put forth by him and was not impressed by Micron because on two or three occasion she interrupted him by directly asking, "you state this, could it also be this"? and he was forced to admit it could be.

Mr Handal said his feeling was the same, but in this kind of case anything was possible.

The last time I visited EDig's palatial headquarters I when talking to FF he mentioned EDig was not standing on it's laurels and was working of "a couple of other things" I did not ask him at the time if these were connected to currect projects or new.. I asked him today to clarify and he said distinctally, NEW... so I guess we now have other thing to look forward to....Of course that's all the info I got from him....per usual...

I am sure as I recollect what I heard today I will remember more but I had a very positive feeling for our side due to a couple of reasons.

#1. Micron had no coherant arguement. They just kept going over, in as many ways as they could, that this did not mean that...etc...

#2. The judge in more than one occasion directly contradicted or questioned Micron on statement they made.

#3. Mr. Handal repeatedly asked the judge, ("techie thing" if what they say is true where is their proof? Micron would have brought up other cases, definitions, to prove their point but DID NOT....all they did was try to say that (connecting 445 to 108) that 445 "DISAVOLLED" the claims in 108 by using their definition of what that meant.

#4 However the most important and lasting impression I received from the entire session was when Mr. Handal told the judge Micron is simply trying to change the meaning of "this and that" and, (very powerful) for the judge to "SIMPLY LOOK AT THE PLAIN MEANING OF WHAT THE PATENT SAYS"

You should have seen the scramble on Micron's part after that one. I thought the atty was going to throw in a "lousy hamburger at McDonalds) as one of his additional points.

I kept shaking my head at all the BS Micron was throwing at the judge. Even I understood what he was trying to do and I will bet the judge did also.

As a disclaimer,,,,OF COURSE ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN, but I feel positive.