Delaware Court Visit
Stopped by the court today and read the dialog between the parties and the judge on 2/26/19. It was concerning the dispute over Dr Paul Prucnal's late in the process deposition. There was a lot of legalese in the conversation, but I was able to determine that the defendants are trying to add a new non infringement theory backed by Dr Prucnal. They were complaining that our side was not presenting our whole case information, making the defendants guess which direction to pursue non infringement. Our lawyer agreed, but said the claim info has been the same since November 2017 with no changes. Our side said that both sides agreed back then to limit claims and discovery to the core issues to limit costs for both sides. If the defendants were allowed to do what they are trying to do, then we have to do a whole new discovery to allow us to respond to new defenses. That would dramatically increase costs, which was why we made the deal in the first place. The judge agreed with both sides on some points, but no definitive point was made by either side. The judge told them to go back and try to resolve it again, if not, to submit briefs on position and he will decide it. I think he was leaning our way on this, because he stated that the defense would only get one defense to use at trial, so adding new stuff at this point wouldnt make much difference. My feeling from the read is that either the defense will trade it for something they want from our side, or the judge will end up siding with our position. IMO.
All information provided is the opinion of this poster from review of information in the public domain.
