I guess that was a Eureka moment. I understood continuance to mean exactly as Milestone has explained. But this clears up my confusion as to why the friendly argument "continued" regarding where mediation is at (or may be at).

So, in light of the agreed motion to expedite a ruling on (? is it Higgins or Shaw?) and the lack of a visible mediation report, is it reasonable to assume that at this point:

No Impasse.

Possible Settlement(s) - not disclosed for the reasons addressed yesterday.

Probable Continuance agreed by all parties, awaiting a ruling from Ward on the (Higgins or Shaw/Hamilton?) issue. With this goes a probable very near term ruling from Ward.

Feedback will be appreciated, as I KNOW nuttin'!

SGE