Free
Message: Re: PACER..Dischino..Cra... No../HATARI--doni
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

"why don't the defendants want to push the Judge for an answer and have a more definitive win?"

With information conveyed from the SHM....e.Digital, at first glance, seemingly does not want the judge to rule on 737. They would have to compromise with the defendants for that privilege...would the defendants be so willing?

There is no way of telling if the defendants might not have wanted the ruling considered....however, it's a possibility.

The informality of the court is so strange....and as Richard suggests it surrounds settlements.

As for the ruling concerns...read the 8K....as I read it, e.Digital had concern for what it proposed and nothing more. Proposals are just that, something to consider.
doni

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