Thats what is wrong with this whole thing. The judge rules based on his interpetation and then can throw the whole thing out after a jury determines what the facts are and that disagrees with his opinion. We have sen to much of that during the last few years just with EDIG. Whats the sense of being a patent holder if it can be challanged for years and the holder be deprived of money due them for being the inventor and then have a series of challanges based on getting it to a judge who thinks like them. And we then have to think that no curruption is taking place. When we say that there is a "RULE" of law then thats what a decision should be based on and not OPINION. They can always find some one that can think like they do and put everything on hold for years while they continue to infringe. What the hell is so difficult to understand.