"... it was filed by bankruptcy counsel who is not counsel of record in this action. Had counsel of record in this action been consulted beforehand, these issues would have been clarified in the original notice"

I have expressed in previous posts that my suspicions are that TPL is unfolding their own private agenda, and that this Chapter 11 filing manuever will not simply be for the end purposes most folks are anticipating or expressing.

I think the quote above from the Infringment lawyers seems to indicate that TPL is acting independently, or directing their BK counsel to act independently. This non- consultation is too obvious of a mistake to not have been made intentionally; especially when the client himself is as legally experienced as DL is. This particular oversight may not be legally significant in and of itself, but it does point to a curious behind the scenes lack of consultation and coordination. The unusual public "outing" with today's Clarification seems to put an exclaimation point on whatever is occuring between the respective lawyers in private.

I believe DL is playing a game within a game ..

The MMP litigation moves forward ... but in the end, creditors beware.