Ron - thanks for sharing that link again with us all.  Herein is a direct quote "The turning point of the case, Anderson said, was RIM’s (failed) attempt to demonstrate that its technology used prior art"

The defendants in our case in Texas are hanging on a similar thread hoping that perhaps hundreds of the best patent attorneys in the world were all "ineffective" when looking for prior art.  But, defense's counsel has a scheme to do exactly what RIMM's counsel did, by using the "cockroach defense" which is coming up with every excuse they can conger. The above quote referencing the same old tired strategy may likely have the same effect on jurors as it did on RIMM, the "turning point" to RIMM's failed defense.

"The only thing we don't know about the future is the history we have failed to learn"  This is why I am optimistic. History is on our side. RIMM paid/is paying, $612.5, Million plus 5.5% royalty for one patent infringement they decided to "go all the way" to trail with.

God bless all and Merry Christmas to all the longs here and everywhere - even RB lol