I agree with a lot of what you write. My opinion is that not only is the judge not an expert, it's better that he isn't. He might have to recluse himself if he was. His job is to evaluate the accuracy and...umm...'veritas'...of a given presentation. In this case he has at least 3, or 4, groups saying, basically, that the others are trash. It is better to have them all in court presenting their positions for him to evaluate. I don't think he'll have one he totally agrees with either. I do think that he may have one that stands head and shoulders above the others, which he may deem one to go forward, or, possibly more likely, one so ridiculous that it ought to die now. And that after they have layed out their positions he may get an examiner to give him a 'fairer' look.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
