If I recall most, if not all, the defence's motions delt with validity issues, which is the domain of the PTO. There were the motions dealing with prior art, the ACP motions. I can't, for the life of me, recall any that delt with infringement issues. There were none that stated the defendents had a valid patent pertaining to there products. I am just trying to visualize what kind of a defence they are going to incorporate. Perhaps it is just that they have purposely chosen not to  disclose all the evidence that they have, but wouldn't that contradict the laws of discovery? We are way past that deadline.

Taking into consideration all of the above,why haven't we filed for a MSJ and why haven't they settled? Does anyone have any theories as to what their defence may be?This is all a learning process for me. Perhaps my conclusions will be that I have no imagination, if so please show me something I am willing to learn.