I am quite pleased that our side did not have black two-pieced suits.....They were grey....I have never seen so many "blackies" in one room in my life.....I think 2/3s of all the lawyers in the world were there and the rest were on the phone, lurking.....and to top it all off they all walked out together in "marching band" style.....They had to turn up the lights in the courtroom it was so bad........
The lead spokeman, attorney, was from....where???......you guessed it....APPLE.... What a "BLOVIATOR".....He talked at length.....seemed like all afternoon and, (to my mind) didn't say one factual thing.....and I got the impression from the judge that he did not say much "on point".
Mr. Handel was quite good, "on point" brief and loaded with facts of cases, law, etc....As I recall the judge asked him only one or two questions for clarification of statements he made.
However the judge did ask quite a few questions of the Apple attorney and they were all questions posed (again in my mind) for the defendents to convince him (the judge) as to the validity of their defence.
"Why are you using Collateral Estopement"? (convince me.....my words)
If CE fails is there another action you will bring such "Judicial Estopment"? (whatever that is)
He asked Mr. Apple a number of questions on why CE should be imposed because the defendents referencing case was not "finalized" and if so should this court use that reference even if "not finalized" and why.....
The judge asked him at least 4 questions on this subject, almost pleading, (again my words) for something concrete to convince him of the validity of their claims.
All in all I was quite pleased and optimistic to our chances of winning this. Mr Handel answered every back and forth from the judge and rebutted all Mr. Apple's claims.
It seems it all boiled down to Apple was basing everything on Judge Kreigers, Colorado, decision BEFORE THE MARKMAN, ON AN INCOMPLETE CLAIMS CONSTRUCTION and not on the entire, new, claims construction issued after the patent office's approval of the new 774 and what it means now. He even said that after the new patent approval which "NARROWED THE SCOPE OF 774" that in effect that ADDED TO THE SCOPE OF THE PATENT AND WAS THEREFORE AN ENTIRELY NEW CLAIM.....In other words pre-Markman was one claim and post-Markman was a completely different claim.
The judge asked him a qustion or to on this, again directing the questioning on the lines of "CONVINCE ME" (again my words)
In my mind and my opinion only but based on common sense and logic, the judge had read all the relevant submitted material and seemed, but I believe by the questions he was asking Mr. Apple, that he needed to be convinced as to the defendents arguement for CE and did not appear to need the same thing from Mr. Handel.
As we all know a judgement can go either way and be swayed by many things but I walked out of that courtroom feeling it was at least 65-35 chance EDig would prevail.
I asked Fred what his feelings were and he said "I don't know,I have no opinion" I think he was being "Fred"......"I know nuttin"
He did indicate he thought it went well and he did state that he was at the Colorado case and knew "right away from the Judge that EDig was in trouble on that one.
Either way the shareholders meeting is in three weeks and the Judge here said he will have his decision in two weeks so we may have good news on that front.
I hope I don't have to eat my words but I am optimistic today, but who knows what Apple has in store if they lose this one......
I still can't believe the "BLOVIATING" Mr. Apple did. If that's the way they win court cases then bring your sleeping bag to the next get together, which by the way ALL and I confirmed this with FF, ALL further legal proceeding on this subject and any other legalities WILL BE DONE RIGHT HERE IN SAN DIEGO....
Frank
