Michael; Your opening comment seems to imply that document 189 is an opening salvo by defendants which is trying to "put the horse before the cart", get the claim construction done first before discovery starts...

This is the defense's response to the DM pulling a fast one by adding a new Claim ,(774),to the complaint that was filed in November, 2009. It is a TACTIC by defense to deny EDIG and DM their right to discovery before the Markman Hearing if held.

I say NICE TRY, and good Luck!?...

The foundation of any Markman Hearing is assessment of "FACTS" by the trier of the facts, (a judge presiding on the Court", where the MARKMAN HEARING is held, who then decides whether a CLAIM is VALID...

There is no way the Judge will limit, circumscribe, or otherwise deny the ability of EDIG and DM to engage in discovery, (expensive, regular or e-discovery, and time consuming), which is essential to discovering records, especially of the foreign corporations, that they could not have any access to, prior to presenting their case for a MARKMAN HEARING...

Denial of right to discvery is a violation of DUE PROCESS, and any such a holding by the Colorado Court would be thrown out on appeal as such...

I get amused by those who seem to persist in Monday Morning quarterbacking DM, and writing that DM MADE A MISTAKE, ETC...To them I say have no worry. DM knows what they are doing and are not worried that they will fall out of their top 100 rankings...Lol...Lol...

Gil...

P.S. Please giveme the Box Net site on more time. My computer that had it crashed...And is 189 posted there in its entirety? I would like to read it...

Gil...

Thank you for your hard work re PACER.t is going to get more busy as we go along...