In the claim construction order signed by Judge Grewal, he does grant the T3's request for a sur-reply to TPL's request to reconsider the DMA CPU term as TPL claims one of the specifications of the DMA CPU supports TPL's proposed construction of DMA CPU. So Judge Grewal may reconsider the DMA CPU term? Or, he has made his decision and will use the allowed T3 sur-reply to support his written decision. It would help to know if the sur-reply was already considered, or if further consideration is needed.