"Will the judge allow what O'Shea is now adding to the case?

"The judge saying, No, to O'Shea, should put half a smile on your face, it means O'Shea is stuck with what he initially presented to the court. Which by his last minute actions must mean his initial pleadings are now weak....subsequent the last two denials."

O'shea's initial arguments may or may not be weak. After following all this on our msg. board, I'd be interested in knowing how others here view our position now. How important, going forward, is the Collateral Estoppel, the appeal of Huawei, and the weakness of the AAPL's motions based on things like jurisdictional disputes? How important are the arguments that Handal tried to 'dupe' the court? Or, is the AAPL position, one of filing tons of motions hoping something sticks and causes lots of 1) delays, 2) costs, and 3) confusion?

It seems to me, that right now, the issue in our appeal is paramount. If we don't prevail, we'll be much more limited in the scope of our suits going forward. The direction and the patents we rely upon will become much more clear. I think this is why our trial court judge wanted this issue of relitigation done with. If the appeasl court finds for us, the case will probably be sent back to the trial court for further litigation. Do you guys think we'll settle, or do you think we'll get to a March hearing?

ORY