maybe i'm whining, but i think HJJ could have done a much better job in wording some of these orders;
a) the vagueness re the discovery docs on w/a: from doc 863, "August 25, 2013 - The parties must produce any documents relevant for determining whether New AdWordsis no more than a colorable variation of the adjudicated product." --obviously google didn't provide what Vringo expected to receive
b) timing of settlement conference with magistrate; the verbiage regarding the timing of the settlement conference doesn't clearly indicate if the actual meeting will happen before or after dec 1. --The verbiage has been posted 1000 times already
c) when will the w/a be decided. the settlement conference has been indicated it is regarding negotiated a royalty rate. however, there is nothing that says that the w/a will have been decided before this happens or at the same time as the rr with the magistrate. from doc 863:
" The Parties Shall Attempt to Determine an Ongoing Royalty Rate As the Federal Circuit suggests, parties should be given the opportunity to set their own
royalty rate before the Court imposes one….."
also from doc 863, i interpret this as insinuating that there is not necessarily a link on the timing of an answer for the RR and W/A:
"Means of Assessing a Reasonable Ongoing Royalty Rate
Once a district court determines that a permanent injunction is not warranted and an
ongoing royalty is necessary to compensate a Plaintiff for future infringement, the Court must fix
an appropriate ongoing royalty. Doing so requires the Court to make three determinations. First,
the Court must determine what the appropriate royalty base is. Second, the Court must
determine what the appropriate royalty rate is. Third, the Court must determine the frequency of
the royalty payment. Furthermore, in situations in which a Defendant argues that it is no longer
infringing on the Plaintiffs technology, the Court must determine the duration an ongoing
royalty should be awarded for as well as whether an ongoing royalty is justified at all."
the base and the frequency have already been determined. there is nothing here that confirms the order or timing of the w/a vs the royalty rate.
the magistrate hearing could end up confirming a royalty rate of 5.5% for example, and the duration of the rr could be pending further clarification on the w/a.
It is possible that the judge could provide a ruling before that time frame or during the meeting with the magistrate. but the more i think about this, i am beginning to think that the w/a confirmation could be delayed even further.
either way,in my opinion, there is nothing here that clearly depicts what to expect in terms of timing.
on top of this, i don't understand the timing of ordering the extra round of independent experts and why so late in the game. (trying to corner google into a settlement, but that's just not going to happen obviously) If he actually decides to use them, it would't seem prudent to have only a couple weeks to obtain objective and in depth analysis.
for me, there is too much uncertainty of timing in the near horizon. This on top of the chance for the w/a going against us, I sold half my position (thank goodness for a profit) apparently right as burgerbarron was.
i'm just not going to get left without dry powder, in case the pps pulls back under 3 (and who knows for how long). I might be wrong, and this could jump tomorrow right back to the 3.10 range, or could pop soon on something of greater significance.. But the trend here is delay delay delay, and I just don't see that changing at this juncture.
my apologies for rant.
Market Data 
Markets 
