Is your opinion re: the '584 and the Js signing on the dotted line have to do with Milestone's opinion that the ultimate settlement will include a license with the Js for the entire MMP, including the '584?

Your continued ascertions that the fine info you've gathered and shared re: the '584 caused the stay (even thought the '584 is no longer part of the case) and will further cause the Js to sign - presumeably - a settlement just has me baffled as to how to reach that conclusion, or how the '584 fits in.

I believe that Albie is using the '584 as an example as to the workings of the '148 and '336 re-examinations. One has to bear in mind that the Markman was not as favorable for the '584 as it was for the '148 and '336. If the responses to the '584 can be used as a guide as to how TPL/Moore have deconstucted any prior art/obviousness, imagine how much easier it will be with the positive Markman on the other patents.

As the Markman has been accepted for the '148/'336,  by both sides, and is therefore part of the USPTO re-exam process, along with, but not restricted to, Despain's evidence, it is quite easy to see the "dotted line" looming large for the Defendants.

Ex Parte Reexamination

Ex parte reexamination is authorized by 35 U.S.C. '' 302-307 and allows a Requester a single opportunity to file a Request to reexamine a patent. Any unexpired patent can be a target of the Request. Only patents or printed prior art publications can be cited in support of the Request, so the proceeding is limited to challenges for invalidity due to novelty (35 U.S.C. ' 102) or obviousness (35 U.S.C. ' 103). A senior examiner other than the original examiner then determines whether a "substantial new question of patentability" is presented in the Request.

If a new question is presented, and the evaluation system is weighted to find that a substantial new question of patentability is presented, the examiner institutes the reexamination. The examiner will send the Owner a letter that sets out all the reasons why the claims are believed to be invalid. The Owner can then respond with narrowing amendments to the claims and arguments against the examiner's reasoning. This process continues without any further input from the Requester until the claims are deemed patentable by the examiner or the Owner seeks an appeal to the USPTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences and, from there, up to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

 http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-3523355_ITM

Be well