Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tayspop729 who wrote (43649)	6/7/2000 2:10:00 PM
From: blake_paterson	Respond to of 93625

Scott: Thanks for the read. In my experience, Summary Disposition / Determination is a risky maneuver frequently put on by the Defense to, at the least, flush out plaintiffs arguments. At the most, get the case thrown out. It worked for me once in a business litigation, but all sorts of crazy (unexpected) consequences followed. None of them involved appeals. It appears that, although they lost the motion, the key tenets of plantiffs (RMBS) arguments have now been "flushed out" by Sega. Hitachi and Sega likely took these into account in their filings made the last week of May, and in planning their defense strategy. And it appears that (per the Judge) Claim 23, US Patent 6,038,195 is key to the Sega part of case (all other claims are dependant). Can you (or any other reasonably unbiased poster) give us a read of the Patent claim? Thanks in advance, BP