Free
Message: Re: PACER..Dischino..Cra... No../HATARI
15
Sep 12, 2011 09:10PM
4
Sep 12, 2011 09:17PM
1
Sep 12, 2011 10:50PM
4
Sep 12, 2011 10:55PM
2
Sep 12, 2011 11:04PM
11
Sep 12, 2011 11:18PM
9
Sep 13, 2011 02:11AM
5
Sep 13, 2011 05:06AM
5
Sep 13, 2011 09:39AM
1
Sep 13, 2011 10:23AM
3
Sep 13, 2011 10:38AM
6
Sep 13, 2011 10:52AM
4
Sep 13, 2011 11:11AM
6
Sep 13, 2011 04:17PM
13
Sep 13, 2011 07:39PM
2
Sep 13, 2011 08:10PM
6
Sep 13, 2011 11:14PM
4
Sep 13, 2011 11:32PM
4
Sep 14, 2011 12:45AM
3
Sep 14, 2011 08:56AM
4
Sep 14, 2011 10:01AM
4
Sep 14, 2011 10:47AM
7
Sep 14, 2011 10:54AM

"more narrowly than proposed "

Does that not indicate, while more narrow the interpretation, it is still in play, thus having value, to a lessor degree perhaps. So it will continue to move forward.

The Q will indicate if the dollar amounts are significantly different or not than the pre-ruling settlement numbers.

If not, we are still looking at 150+ yet unnamed infringers with a net to EDIG.

4
Sep 16, 2011 12:43PM
3
Sep 16, 2011 12:53PM
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply