I agree with you that it would take ownership to be resolved for a settlement to occur. The February filing does, however, resolve the ownership for the purposes of the trial. (Not here to argue, blue is really not my color, simply stating the facts) The reason the stay referenced ownership (in my opinion) is because at the time of the filing, the Daic parties had not yet removed the ownership cliams from their suit (which we all know they subsequently have). The state case is now a monetary dispute nothing more or less.
The patent was initially mortgaged because there was no other value in the company to pay a bogus (in my opinion) settlement. The Daic parties have withdrawn their claim to the mortgaging of the patent in the state case and focussed on pursuing the monetary dispute. If there is a settlement with T-Mobile then Calypso would have the money to pay any judgement (it would really only affect the share price). If there is no settlement or other source of income, then Daic could petition the court to auction off the patent to cover the amounts due. In my opinion, if Calypso loses the state case, they will own Daic the amount of the verdict, regarless of the outcome of the federal court case. The outcome merely dicates the methods taken to pay the debt.
My opinions based on what I read, not fact or an arguement. Read the info yourself and make your own conclusions. (its obvious you already have an opinion, I was merely suggesting a deeper reading of the materials available in the courts to see if it would affect your seeming steadfast perspective)
