Wave Systems Corp. (fka WAVXQ)

[Zeev Hed]

Read the claims as finally granted, no such language there. The independent claims of '202 are 1, 14, 17 and one method claim, 18, all have co-processors and an interface to a host microprocessor or computer. Typically, from my experience, when the specification is broader than the claim, it means that during prosecution, the claims were narrowed because of prior art. Under these circumstances,the Markman decision eliminates the doctrine of equivalents and the claims must be read (apply protection) to just what was claimed and not to any equivalents to what was claimed. You got to have the file wraper to know the details, though. Of course, a patent lawyer if any is on this thread, could better analyze this situation. If someone designs a security function without the interface integrating the co-processor into the processor ( just as Math Co-processors and many graphics processing functions were integrated into microprocessors), it is not infringing on '202.