SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin
RMBS 88.13+1.0%Nov 21 9:30 AM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: charred water who wrote (67813)3/15/2001 5:25:09 PM
From: Bilow  Read Replies (1) of 93625
 
Hi charred water; Re: "Carl, the patents at issue are the ones in the docket I linked in the original post." Agreed.

Re: "The PTO has granted the claims in those patents." Agreed.

Re: "It seems like you are wishing it were otherwise." The PTO should not have issued those patents. The issuing of those patents has cost a lot of investors a lot of money. Only the lawyers made out for sure on this. So yeah, I wish it were otherwise. But I do recognize that the patent office did grant those claims.

Rambus wants a trial that assumes the above patents are valid. If that happens, the court will have to rule that there was infringement, though the JEDEC issues would still be there. Unfortunately for Rambus, that is not what is happening.

Instead, the language that is being used is the language of the original 1990 filing. That is where you must look for the claims, not the 4 divisional patents you listed.

Again. The divisional patents you listed are Rambus' wet dream about what the trial should be about. Instead, the trial is about the original 1990 patent filing. So go look up the claims in the original 1990 filing already. Hint: Use Rambusite.

Re: "Can you refer to some basis that the preliminary claims in the 1990 filing are pertinent?" Go read the Markman filings by Rambus and Infineon, and you will find that what I described above is the difference between the two company's contending Markman proposals. They're on Rambusite.

-- Carl
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News