I think the difference here is that the onus is now on Bungie to prove that they are not RPI. They are not allowed to submit new evidence. They have to submit an argument that they are not an RPI. They can't just say "Hey, you guys said we weren't an RPI before so let's just go with that. Whatdya think?".
What argument do you think Bungie can submit with the lack of new evidence that would prove that they are not an RPI?
This is basically a small do-over. The ruling is that Bungie must now bear the burden of proof this time around. If worlds evidence (the contract) will not be permitted, can Bungie be allowed to produce a contract? I don't believe so. Not sure how Attorney argument proves anything? Also, was there a mention of any other evidence provided by Bungie at the ptab that would help their cause? I don't remember reading anything about it. The thing that helps their case is a contract with Atvi that doesn't imply privy,(which probably doesn't exist) and only if it already exists in evidence. Correct me if I'm wrong.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
