reading what I could understand about Samsungs replies, expecially the first one, all tech that I did not understand a word of.....

WHERES DONI WHEN YOU NEED HIM...?????

However I did read all the others and did get the jest of all the SH*T Samsung was throwing against the wall which appeared to me to be rehashing the same things over and over. MY uneducated guess is all of what they said could have fit in 2 paragraphs.

However, nowhere DID I SEE A DENIAL OF USAGE OF EDIGITALS IP.

I think the purpose of the mountain of paperwork supplied was to create utter confusion....but then again perhaps LL can wade through some of it and give us his experienced opinion.

However the bottom line of my understanding of what I just read was the complete "dissing" of EDigital to be uncooperative, stupid, naive, trying to pull a fast over on THE COURT and in general not presenting a solid, well founded case.

DOES THAT SOUND LIKE DM TO YOU? If what was presented from Samsung is a truism then we had better get another Lawfirm to handle our case because it appears from what Samsung is implying that whoever is handling the legal work is a BOY AMONGST MEN.......

We all know DM and its capabilities over this past year or so. Does what Samsung says fit DM????

Samsung is calling this whole thing a basket of ineptitude by EDigital (by extension it's legal counsel DM) I cannot believe DM could be anywhere near as incompetant as Samsung is implying...

Therefore it my opionion (ONLY) that Samsung is admitting it doesn't have a very good answer to EDigital's IP lawsuit..