You were doing fine till you got to what follows, and then you got "Off base"...

Eventually they will finish presenting all there BS and hopefully get the judge to come down to an agreement. No one gets blamed (accused) in who's at fault. No one will admit wrong doing, ain't gonna happen.

Then the judge decides who gets what and hopefully everyone is happy with his decision and he tells them to be on their way.

Next!

Nothing happening here is paving the way for the next 180 bad guys as I see it."...

MARKMAN was a break from the accepted rule govering Jury trials where a jury is the trier of the facts. They listen to the FACTS, are told what the applicable law is by the judge, and then they apply the law to the facts and decide the what the damages are...

Go back and read MARKAMN. You will notice that MARKAMAN permitted the Judge to be the trier of the FACTS instead of the Jury. The only question left for the jury to decide after the MARKMAN HEARING is now "HOW MUCH" the damages are?

So, the judge does not decide who gets what. And the judge does not "Come down with any agreements...

And you are wrong in your staement that "No one gets b lamed(accused) inwho's at fault. No one will admit wrong doing, aint gonna happen.)...

In decididing the fact that cameras made by SAMSUNG have infringed on EDIG patents, the Judge under Markman is in essence deciding the question of FAULT.

That is why MARKMAN HEARING is so significant. And that is why WARD'S COURT is so busy...It removes the onerous task of presnting highly technical data for a decision bny lay persons sitiing on the jury. Instead it allows a highly trained Court personnel augmented by technical experts to decide issues relating to liability or Fault and lets the Jury determine the amount of damages...

All this was disscussed here when the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal issued their decision in Sandisk v. SMT Electronics, where Jutice Bryson discussed the impact of MARKAMN case. You must have been absent then...HOPE THIS HELPS.

Gil...