Mrkool just pointing out your opinion has substantial facts and actions and even lack of actions against it proving it to be wrong. The markman ruling hurt edig. Edig admits it, the judge stated she sees her ruling being seen as dispostive by all parties (dispositive means very bad to edig) Duane Morris admitted it was against us. I believe 6 of the remaining cases were dropped, edig nor DM filed an appeal or a more Important summary request giving them the opportunity to appeal.
You pose the question often why would.........? So I pose to you then why would edig and Duane Morris if this ruling was so far off the mark and unreasoned and whatever else you imply why would they not challenge it. Especially since it hurt edig big time in the remaining cases of that round and now lingers as a thorn in our eye now. If it's so easy to prove it was incompetent then why no challenge especially when it hurt edig admitted by them big time.
So why mrkool if what you are now portraying as your opinion was such an incompetent ruling wasn't it challenged.
And i havent missed much as I follow thismstock closely as all know. I read the entire judges markman ruling and it was detailed and she backed everything with case law and specifically cited issues determined from Phillips case which set guidelines for markman hearings. Just an example when she was referring to processed sound she cited woody,s own testimony, how he became his own lexicographer how he used the term and then how he stopped using it when It became digital data. She then cited the guideline set by Phillips that stated terms should also be looked at as being termed by the inventor making the inventor in essence his own lexicographer. Which means she used the very guidelines set up with the Phillips ruling to let woody define processed sounds. You questioned this part of it too and yet it's a guideline set down by the Phillips rulings.
There were many many others and from what I recall when she ruled or referred to why she ruled she referenced not just one but many things that supported why she ruled and how she came to those decision. The whole flash as ram had several components where she cited numerous different claimsetc supporting her ruling on that.
It was actually masterful how she tied it all up.
So somebody missed something alright but it wasn't me.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
