Health Discovery Corp (HDVY)

[MBMoney]

Well, putting aside the back-and-forth commentary while we are at each others' throats, I was intrigued by following statement in HDC's March 30th Opening Claim Construction Brief:

To this end, Defendant’s erroneous proposed constructions would not aid the jury’s understanding of the claims – but instead only confuse them. The controversy between HDC and Intel has been ongoing for over a decade. Ultimately, Intel’s proposed constructions here are yet another ill-fated attempt to skirt its long history of infringing HDC’s patents, as are the seven (7) Inter Partes review (IPR) petitions it recently filed before the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The meaning of the terms at issue, in the context of the claims and specifications, is straightforward and uncomplicated.

Looks like our attorneys are trying to keep this issue a straightforward one, without allowing for enhanced complexity to an already complex lawsuit. I kind of chuckled when I saw that Intel ended up filing 7 IPR petitions, so I'm not sure how the PTAB is going to size all this up and make determinations in a timely manner. I also wonder what the judge will think of all this. I saw that Intel had filed 3 IPR petitions in the VLSI case, but it sounded as though that case may have been further along at the time of the IPR petition filings.