JEFOTHER...
You say...
"A successful settlement track record will go a long way towards "unofficially validating" our patents and raising the stakes. Lose at Markman and we are done."...
Although, in the abstract, I have no problem with the notion that many and repeated "Settlements" effectuated by DM would have an interstitial impact on spreading the notion that EDIG patents are Valid, I disagree that DM would, (1) as a matter of Strategy chose to steer away from a Markman Hearing; and, (2) nor could he escape a "Markman Hearing", as eventually one of the 174 cases shall go through the trial phase, and at that point there shall be a Markman Hearing...
On the other hand there is appellate case law,
SANDISK, INC., vs. STMICROELECTRONICS NV, 480 F 3D 1382, March 26, 2007,
which clearly discusses the impact of a Markman Hearing on the course of a trial, availing both defendants and plaintiff's to Article III proceedings to expeditiously conclude litigations through Summary Judgment Motions...
In short, what I am saying is that at some point DM shall get his Markman Hearing and favorable RULING. For no amount of settlements will have the same impact on the further progress of his litigation efforts against the remaining defendants as a FAVORABLE MARKMAN RULING issued by some Federal judge would.
Repeated settlements are not Res Judicata and do n ot avail plaintif to Article III proceedings...
Gil...
