iT'S not amazing to me....I am not an attorney and have zero knowledge of what can be done or not done but I did sit in that courtroom and heard Mr. Apple bloviate on and on about the Colorado ruling (prior to Markman) and how this was the ENTIRE CASE......Mr. Handal made an attempt to rebutt but, as it turns out, was unsuccessful.

Would someone explain to me how a decision based on an "incomplete" (I HAVE NO IDEA IF I AM ASKING THE CORRECT QUESTION BUT I HOPE SOMEONE UNDERSTANDS WHAT I MEAN) patent cannot be amended or relitigated??? It seems to me those are 2 ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ENTITIES.....even if settled.....we did not settle on the entire patent only that portion before the Markman.......If we can get the Colorado court to recognize the entire case then we have an entirely different "claims construction"

Please help me in my ignorance......Frank