and then there's

5. How, on yet another front involving the Colorado case/defendants...took place the arguing over issues of claim construction language un-related to the sole memory claims construction issue...An argument regarding language over control circuitry issues and how circuit board periphery device components are powered on and off....which lead to a re-exam in that regard…by one of the defendants. The SC/CE judge focused on this re-exam and its initial intent and disregarded the full and final re-exam.

How does Handal explain all that, as, IMO, its important to have a complete understanding when having to rule over a previous courts findings..

This is one f’n maze…

doni