"If" some are worried that the other side use's what we say against us.

That is exactly what the T3 are attempting to do. IMO it is a light argument in relation to the remaining reexamination prosecution history listed on PAIR for all to read.

The issue with the remainder of your post is you do not go into the detail of the 749 and 890 regarding the "right justified" term and how the T3 and TPL argue the point. And even then it is very difficult to say. Judge Ward ruled against us on the 584 (related to the 749 and 890 to a lesser extent). We amended at the USPTO (narrowed scope?) and now we await Judge Ware's ruling on whether all instructions must be "right justified", which would exclude some infringing technology by the T3.

IMO if Judge Ware has to rely on the specialist for any major decision making, we were in trouble the day the case was transfered to Judge Ware. Judge Ware has overseen many complex IP cases, so I think he is intelligent enough to properly interpret the information and make the proper decision.