You say, "just because evidence was submitted on the '336 and '148 patents previously with regards to the J3, it will be the same for the T3."

What? How do you completely jump to this conclusion. Where did I say that? You are putting words in my mouth and being very disingenious

Me: This is bullshit. If TPL didn't confuse the matter by asserting their own technology along with ours (the mmp), I am reasonably certain we would be on our way back to Texas. Combine for economies of scale at the loss of a favorable district where we have already argued all of the MMP patents

Please note my bolding in your "Me" statement.

I will correct your statement that all of the MMP patents were argued: The '584 partially, the '148 and '336 in greater depth.

How Judge Ward looks at the '148 and '336 is of far less importance than how a jury perceives them in assessing infringement and damages, in my opinion.

If misunderstandings can occur while reading a simple message, just imagine how much this can be magnified when a lay person opines on legal texts/proceedings.

Be well