I could be wrong, but I think the court (especially the female judge) is hung up on disclaimers that were made in the prosecution history with regard to the patents (thanks prior attorneys).  If so and if they continue to use the same reasoning, it could be a fatal blow to our efforts. 

I agree with our broad agrument that the PPL does not / should not defeat the defendants infringement on the core of the claim - but we have argued this in the past to no avail.  Their adding controling devices outside (PPL) of the variable speed ocillator should not negate the fact that they infringed on the core VCO patent.

They tended to hammer our side more than the other....but that could be a funtion of being the ones who brought the claim.  I agree, it could go either way but I don't feel good about the tone nore the core hurdles (threshold to overturn) that we would need to clear to reverse and remand (still have my fingures crossed however).