on one hand i don't have a clue, but injunctions come into a different area of law, i forget the two words at the moment--id have to seard...ah the word is "equity" an injunction comes under the "equity" branch--its totally different from the other more common branch in which 99 percent of court processes occur. an injunction is an "equity" action, so it stands alone it needs no case it is the fullness of what it is in and of itself. If the court has already ruled that they infringed but has given notice that it will be a few more weeks for the decision to come out, this is the perfect thing to do--what its doing is setting up for the possibility that the judge will stay the injunction prior to trial--given that this is a possibility given the limited information that both parties might have already recieved an injunction is the best move for several reasons, 1, it keeps the pressure on tmobile, 2 it re-iterates the damage done to calypso is ongoing and relief is needed 3 if matiews did it, he knows this will not upset the eastern district, but rather will allow them to tip towards an injunction sooner than later. 4 even if it doesn't it winds up being an interloquitory motion relative to trial--for more things to be hashed out regarding the definitions, may give another avenue to some preliminary discovery including additional interrogatories--further they might be able to get the 1.6 billion into escrow from the metro pcs deal since tmobile has already admitted to having it readilly available :)
