* e.Digital has a right to enforce its patents and protect their patented technology.
* Handal & Associates was hired to enforce and protect e.Digital patented technology.
* The 22 potential infringers used e.Digital's patented technology without permission and if found guilty, they will pay. Simple, straight-forward, and it's the law. So far, several have settled with licensing agreements.
All, I've combined all the FACTS about the e.Digital Infringement Cases with the current Docket Report in a spreadsheet for each case, open or closed, this should help keep us up to date on the proceedings of the cases. If you want to view the Docket Report, just click the name of the case and the link should take you to it.
Yes, I do. In law, a "trial de novo" is a form of appeal in which the appeals court holds a trial as if no prior trial had been held. However, I don't know what relevance the term has to the current discussion.
When the Federal Circuit hears an appeal of a Markman ruling, it does it de novo although it will not consider arguments and claim constructions not considered by the trial court. However, because e.Digital dismissed the remaining defendants after the Colorado Markman ruling, there was no right to an appeal.
If e.Digital wanted to appeal they would have let the defendants file for summary judgment of non-infringement, which would have been granted, and then file an appeal with the Federal Circuit.
Apparently that ruling caused Duane Morris to be unwilling to file any more infringement action regarding e.Digital's Flash-related patents.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
