Good point on Markham Hearings, but a speedy Texas venue and quick rendering does enhance expectations (time is money) as can be gleaned from the excerpt below:

http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=19802167

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas agreed with Intergraph in 2002, labeling Intergraph`s patents ``valid and enforceable`` and finding that Itanium ``literally infringes`` upon those patents. Intel appealed that decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 2002 after failing to persuade Texas Judge T. John Ward to reconsider his decision.

In its appeal, Intel argued that the lower court had misinterpreted a number of terms related to devices within microprocessors, including ``pipeline identifier`` and ``crossbar,`` as they were stated in Intergraph`s patents. Prior to the trial in June 2002, the judge read the applicable patents in what is called a Markman hearing, and defined those patents as they apply to the issues in the case.

R/ Raillery