Replies to post #59328 on Calypso Wireless (fka CLYW)

[woops]

Sir,

How do you address footnote #2 from tm's motion to dismiss:

"In any event, T-Mobile does not offer any products or services with an auto-switching capability dependent on the establishment of a pre-established vicinity range under the Court’s December 3, 2012 claim construction order on the ’923 patent in the co-pending case. T-Mobile requests that the Court take judicial notice of that claim construction order. See Claim Construction Memorandum and Order, First Action (Dkt. 281) at 32."


This strikes me as funny:
"T-Mobile does not offer any products or services with an auto-switching capability dependent on the establishment of a pre-established vicinity range"

Just to be clear, one doesn't 'establish' a pre-established vicinity range, rather its a range inherent in the hardware of the computer facility itself. Also, if it is already "pre-established" you don't need to establish it.

[usandy]

SirH, I am not an IT professional, but I have owned CLYW since 2004. I have always thought the patent worked by constantly evaluating the available signal strengths and automatically switched to the strongest of them. I understand it is to TMobiles advantage to rephrase the case terms to favor their side, but can't our side still represent the patents value as constantly monitoring signal strength and them switching the phone to that one?