DD: I just found the Patented "Core" already being made by another company (not the XYBR part, but something which appears to have the same form fit and function prior to the patent). I looked at both these devices and I can not see material differences. The Epson product has been built long before the 2/22/00 patent award Therefore, in my opinion, the potental impact and any revenues from this patent would be impacted significant due to prior work and uses.
Again it was new of this patent that moved the stock up.
Let's first look at the Patent of XYBR
United States Patent 6,029,183
164.195.100.11;
Here is the brief discription of the patent from the patent text.
The core unit will comprise a CPU, memory means, internal non-volatile storage means, activation means, video, I/O interface and support circuitry. The core unit will not function as a computer unless it is in or on or in electrical contact with a specifically designed mating enclosure.
Now look at the Epson SCE86325...note how this unit is transferable and is capable of connecting devices and peripherals of various types via its 236-pin card
connector.
Let's look at the patent checklist Do both have?
1. CPU ----------------------yes
2. Memory--------------------yes
3. Non Volitale Storage -----Yes
4. Activation----------------Yes
5. I/0 and support circutry--Yes
A microcomputer processor card Epson Card SCE86325 series by Seiko Epson Corporation of Japan, includes at least 1 MB RAM, 128 K ROM, FDC and keyboard controller, VGA controller, one or more serial and parallel port controllers and the functionality of an IBM PC AT microcomputer accessible via a single 236 pin card connector. The Epson Card presents a characteristic length of no more than 86 mm, a characteristic width of no more than 55 mm and a characteristic height of no more than 6 mm. The portable, removable and/or rechargeable power supply is operably coupled to the microcomputer processor card.
|
