I am cautiously optimistic that Judge Du will respond positively and see the light. I have almost never in 27 1/2 years of practice appeared in front of Judge who is a Gen-X contemporary, or even younger. Judge Du is one such Judge.
I feel we will be able to connect and with sound guidance (Curfman, Bhatt, Jarvis, HK), she will see the right thing to do, and strive to do the right thing. If I am wrong, and Judge Du has negative characteristics preventing her from doing so, then I will be proven wrong. But if that happens, I will only fight harder on appeal.
Obviously your first and third reaction would be great for us, second reaction not so much. To answer the second reaction, yes we are trying to have the Court look at it again, because the Court got it wrong, and the Court was improperly misled.
The absolute bottom line purpose of the Court as an institution transcending not only this case, but all cases in all courts, is to do justice, and base its decisions upon the truth. What happened here previously, was not the truth. We have the truth.
Most Rule 60s fail because as a general rule, judgments are presumed to be final, appropriate, and enforceable. Most Rule 60s are akin to Hail Mary plays. However, every Rule 60 is dependent on its facts. We have powerful factual and legal circumstances in our favor.
In terms of other judges' reactions, anyone is free to look at some of the key Rule 60 cases cited in our Brief.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
