Assuming what LL surmises as to how Duane Morris came to represent EDIG, the following may help with answering some of the questions raised:...

FIRST:...

Th following is whay Duane Morris states how they handle Patent Cases:

In today's legal environment, however, only a small percentage of cases go to trial. Thus, it is crucial that you have counsel who is focused on your business objectives and the most cost-effective means of achieving those objectives. If a creative business resolution is in order, we will litigate the case in a manner that will drive the case toward such a resolution. We also have extensive experience in the use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. From the outset of each case, we explore with our clients the potential risks, opportunities and costs associated with various strategies for dispute resolution, including litigation, mediation, arbitration, and negotiated settlements.

With Duane Morris, your legal representation is being provided by attorneys who have handled intellectual property cases of all kinds, including patents, trademarks, trade secrets and copyrights. Our clients include businesses large and small, universities and individuals. We can litigate cases in a cost-effective manner in any venue, whether it be state court, federal district court, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or the International Trade Commission.

Indeed, our intellectual property litigators have been involved in many of the cases that have defined the scope of intellectual property rights. These cases resulted in decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States or of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the special appeals court for patent cases. Representative lawsuits include College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Educ. Expense Bd., a case that resulted in two Supreme Court decisions defining the limits of applicability of federal patent and trademark laws to state entities; Nobelpharma AB v. Implant Innovations, Inc., a Federal Circuit decision affirming a major award of damages to our client for the plaintiff's antitrust violation in attempting to enforce a patent procured through fraud; and Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., which resulted in decisions of the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court establishing that interpretation of patent claims is a question of law to be decided by a judge rather than by a jury, in what have become known as "Markman" hearings.

Patent Litigation

Duane Morris patent litigators have handled disputes in fields such as biotechnology, medical devices, semiconductor manufacturing, television set-top boxes, Internet and e-mail related technologies, factory automation, oil drilling, water treatment and purification, electrical components and fiberglass boat manufacturing. Our patent litigators combine mastery in trial advocacy, an in-depth knowledge of patent law, an aptitude for science and technology and a focus on our clients' business objectives. We represent clients in enforcing their patents, defending against claims of patent infringement, and disputes concerning inventorship and ownership of patents, and patent licenses. Duane Morris litigators have played a leading role in some of the most important cases in the field of patent law, as well as some of the most complex (including the largest patent case ever tried before the International Trade Commission). In 2005, Duane Morris was recognized as the 13th most active patent litigation firm in the U.S., as well as ranked 16th nationally in the number of new patent litigation matters undertaken in 2005, according to IP Law360.

In every patent case, our litigators either have the necessary technical expertise or work closely with patent specialists who have such technical expertise. Dozens of our attorneys practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Our attorneys hold technical or scientific degrees in fields such as computer science, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, chemistry, chemical engineering, physics, nuclear engineering, microbiology, molecular biophysics and biochemistry. We have experience in all aspects of patent law, including patent preparation and prosecution, clearance opinions and interference proceedings. Our approach to patent litigation makes it easier for our clients to transfer complex technical information to our attorneys and enables us to present that information to judges and juries in a simple and persuasive way."

(emphasis added)

SECOND:...

The decision of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Sandisk case compels the "Moving" of these cases by counsel. In the words of Justice Bryson you write to "potential infringers", as to why you think they "Infringe" on your patents, together with a "put up or shut up" letter giving them a reasonable time to respond.

If they ignore your letter and do not respond, or they respond and deny that they are "infringing", you file for a Article III, Declaratory Judgement on your case that you have filed when you sent your "put up or shut up" letter. Sandisk case if here:

http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/05-13...

It is also found and discussed on Duane Morris site...

THIRD:

Considering that Duane Morris is working on contingency fee agreement, and they are to ADVANCE COSTS, IMO, they have all the incintive in the world to "Move" this case right along...

GLTA...

Gil...