If TPL were to believe that juries are unable to understand the technology it would imply a total lack of ability and conviction in their ability to demonstrate the said infringement. This I do not believe.

As to the J3, the deal is done and I have been with SGE1 all along regarding the MOU and retention of jurisdiction. Without these, I would argue that there is nothing more to come, ever. However, they are there and I have yet to see a convincing legal argument that precludes a contingent liability.

I'm afraid the suggestion that it is so that PTSC/TPL can't litigate again is weak as all the J3 have to do in such an eventuality is reference the order.

Be well