RE:Not a new patent. RoyallyScrewed wrote: It's a continuation of theuir existing patent. How many times do I have tyo post this? This is a direct quote from their patent on the USPTO site.p which clearly states its relationship..
United States Patent: 11356308 (uspto.gov) "
RELATED APPLICATIONS: This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 16/266,920, filed Feb. 4, 2019, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 15/644,071, filed Jul. 7, 2017, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,200,223, issued Feb. 5, 2019, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 14/853,688, filed Sep. 14, 2015, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,705,715, issued Jul. 11, 2017, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/846,285, filed Mar. 18, 2013, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,136,811, issued Sep. 15, 2015, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/472,797, filed Jun. 22, 2006, now abandoned, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/357,910, filed Feb. 17, 2006, now abandoned, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/190,071 filed Jul. 26, 2005, now abandoned, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/591,381, filed on Jul. 26, 2004. The entire teachings of the above applications are incorporated herein by reference.
Post it as often as you like. I was surprised it took this long. As I said to Leo - pull both patents up and read the full context of the "claims" and the "description" and then tell me there is no difference.
Been a while since I last read it.
And I can likely assume that you will tell me it makes no difference anyway, even if it does cover different aspects regarding dual channel and multichannel.
Have at it! And enjoy the weekend as well!