indicating that it would cause them undo hardship should the trial be postponed until January.

TPL argued for the stay saying that the late disclosure of

 thousands of pages 

of new technical documents  needed to be reviewed.

Can the J's  now argue for a stay  that pushes the trial out beyond january.

Aren't they arguing For omething that previously argued against?

I thought that this was not allowed? (latches??) 

 Seems that a one sided stay request by the  J's is a bit out of

order