|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 16 2013 @ 03:44 PM EDT |
Additionally, in Apple's Rebuttal, after the Markman document in Update 3, on a
page numbered 5, but which the blue text at the top of the document calls :
Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1203 Filed07/10/12 Page8 of 13,
Apple explains why it believes Samsung is trying to twist the meaning of
"edge of the electronic document" to include internal edges, such as
edges of a paragraph or photograph included in the document. That being, that
Samsung is trying to twist the meaning of the claims so that it reads on Lira.
If "edge of document" can mean and internal edge, then Samsung will
argue that the center of the document is an internal edge. Apple argues that
edge of the electronic document has its ordinary meaning [in my words, an outer
edge, like the edge of a piece of paper]. Here's a snippet from that portion of
Apple's argument:
The reason for Samsung’s insistence that any lines or “boundaries” can delineate
an “electronic document” is clear. Its prior art, including the “LaunchTile” and
“Lira” references, has lines that Samsung would like to classify as
demarcating an “electronic document.” Yet even Dr. Van Dam recognized that there
should be limits on what could qualify as an electronic document. When asked if
a para
graph within a Microsoft Word document could be an electronic document, he
answered: “If you are talking abou
t I have a typesetting program and it produces paragraphs, then those paragraphs
don’t really have a separate
identity, and I would find it not very useful to consider them an electronic
document, but there is no hard-a
nd-fast rule.” (Ahn Rebuttal Decl. Ex. 5 at 58:25-
59:16) (emphasis added.) [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
