I think what was at issue was that TPL in it's diclosures mentioned chip families that were infringing. Toshiba contered that chip families was not specific enough since there are many variables in chip families and that TPL was being basiclly lazy. TPL countered that due to court mandates on the allowable lengths of files submiited to the court that it could not at that time be that specific since it would take over 12,000 pages of documents to be that specific.And that chip families was a term discussed between the litigates in previous conversations TPL was given an extention to provide the specific documention. The above is how I remember it. Just my analysis of the situation and all MHO Now again just my opinion but this specific documention is very critical to the amount of infringement TPL/PTSC will be allowed. That is why I think Jim Turleys special assignment is to help catelog the infringement. JMHO