actually, Fuji was denied its motion on "Ex Parte MOTION to Shorten Time" doc 69

....which it then amended with doc 70, and then denied on the amended doc 70 with doc 73....lol

Its initial motion to "amend partial judgment" (an agreement with e.Digital ), doc 66, was recently "withdrawn" with doc 76

It then recently joined Apple to "amend partial judgment" issue with doc 78.

There are three basic motions by defendants before the court.

1. Amend partial judgment,....to be ruled

2. stay the case, to be ruled for others (Apple), however, e.Digital granted and court approved to Fuji for issues relating in its recent partial settlement.

and 3. shorten time to judgment on 774 to be ruled ... or 108 if it's part of their infringement action. (which e.Digital did not grant to Fuji and Fuji did not motion for it again as it has already been denied twice that action)

IMO, O'Shea seems to be experimenting with Fuji....lol

amazing stuff...I mean shuffle...

doni