>Speculation is a favorite pastime of this board.

NO Kidding.....they were all freaking out when TPL Website went down, you virtually saw all kinds of negative posts as well as positive. Many are like Parnoid Chiwawah Dogs LOL

It was not necessary for the Special Master to allow us a second round of amending the ICs.

Powerful and valid point!

>The SM was well aware of our arguments that Barco was attempting to litigate the case through the IC issue, trying to short circuit the system for their benefit by demanding proof, not just contentions.

Barco thought that they could jump the gun, first to file a lawsuit does not mean that they will have preference in the court procedings, things are done different here than the way the do them in Europe.

>And it appears that the SM was keenly aware of what discovery is turning up. show?

YES, I am Glad that he is a fair SM, otherwise we would have all taken a beating by now

>How much further did the revised ICs go in providing the PROOF that Barco was looking for?

Alot, the wonderful thing is that this allowed TPL to add additional IC for the other patent.

>Barco was looking to win by litigating the IC issue. I'm wondering if it is possible that they lost via the same route?

I hope your wondering is right, and I chose to believe you are right, I have to believe that you are right....its my best option.

> Is it possible to have a SJ based solely on overwhelming evidence contained in the revised ICs prior to any Markman?

Good ole Ronran, mayb be able to answer that one.

Are we waiting for Barco to settle before we see the Markman?

I sure hope NOT, we need to make an example out of these baustard companies!

So that NO one else will dare challenge validitya nd infringement again!

Atomicus Perfectmus