One of my favorite moments in this whole process will be the argument of this point:
"Look at our Exhibit F, the Kurabayashi paper. Now look at Table 3, it has five rows. Now look at Defendants' Post-trial Findings of Fact (their final submission before the Court began deliberating on its decision), there are only three rows. Now look at the Court's Opinion, there are only three rows. HOW DOES THIS HAPPEN?
How do Defendants submit Table 3 with only three rows, conspicuously missing the "NS" portion which would directly contradict the Court's decision? HOW IS THIS TOLERABLE OR EXCUSABLE UNDER ANY OBJECTIVE STANDARD? Most respectfully, this Court was misled by this alteration, as evidenced by the three row Table from Defendants' Proposed Findings of Fact being copied directly into the Court's Opinion. The Court's wrath needs to be directed at Defendants in the form of vacating the Judgment."