Had a lawyer friend inform me that Judge Krieger's ruling could possibly impact future lawsuits, but not necessarily. There's a source of law called Persuasive Authority that a court consults in deciding cases, but does not have to apply. Compared with Binding Authority, which is a source of law that a judge must apply when making a decision. My friend said it's possible that a more patentee-friendly court, such as the Eastern District of Texas, might come to a conclusion different than that of Judge Krieger. Now I understand why DM wants to, "Get out of Dodge" and file round 3 in another state. If DM were to file again in Colorado, a judge may decide to apply Judge Krieger's earlier ruling since she's "on his team", so to speak. Looks like my days of attending court hearings is all over. LOL

He also indicated there would be a new Markman hearing in each new case filed. And this would be even more likely if the PTO re-exam of EDIG's patents issues a clarification that is favorable to EDIG.

-------

PERSUASIVE AUTHORITY
Sources of law, such as related cases or legal encyclopedias, that the
court consults in deciding a case, but which, unlike binding authority,
the court need not apply in reaching its conclusion.

BINDING AUTHORITY
Source of law that a judge must evaluate when making a decision in a
case. For example, statutes from the same state where a case is being
brought, or higher court decisions, are binding authority for a judge.

-------

No motion on PACER to dismiss D&M Holdings, but it'll be there soon.