As an example, let's take the first independent claim from the '662 patent:

" A storage system, comprising:

one or more memory sections, including one or more memory devices having storage locations for storing data, and a memory section controller capable of detecting faults in the memory section and transmitting a fault message in response to the detected faults; and one or more switches, including one or more interfaces for connecting to one or more external devices; and a switch fabric connected to one or more memory sections and the external device interfaces and interconnecting the memory sections and the external device interfaces based on an algorithm; and a management system capable of receiving fault messages from the memory section controllers and removing from service the memory section from which the fault message was received, and wherein the management system is further capable of determining an algorithm for use by a switch fabric in interconnecting the memory sections and the external device interfaces, and instructing the switch to execute the determined algorithm, wherein an interface of the switch is connected to a non-volatile storage device, and wherein the management system is further capable of instructing the non-volatile storage device to load data into one or more of the memory sections via the switch."

So... any HA system ever invented? Like the summary said. Great, thanks. Glad that you won a point on "you didn't read the claims!!!!1111" which are content-free garbage, like every other software patent.

Because "the claims" define what the patent actually covers.

Note that the claims can't be read in isolation. The words in the claims get their meaning from the specification. For example, a claim could use the word "lawnmower" to refer to what you and I would call a banana by defining "lawnmower" appropriately.

Just looking at the claims is better than nothing, but is still basically useless.

Yeah, a patentee can be his own lexicographer, but... I've never seen anything like this in practice, and I've read a lot of patents. Reading the claims in isolation generally gives you a pretty good idea of what the patent's about, once you get the hang of claim reading.

Your right though that they do word these things so losely that my mother giving birth to me many years ago probably violated some routing patent and in that I agree fully with you in that it is just wrong.

Your both right :)

Though all of us agree trolls are bad in any form, and in that I look forward to these trolls getting educated at there own expence when they lose.

You mean "the most important part, by far."

Your right I didnt read there claims but when somebody says 3 and there working out is 1+1 then I'll look at the working out and not there conclusion. In this case its the patents.