Is that it? With or without prejudice? Any indication sman? That's important. If without, EDIG can redo. Seems like a problem which can be rectified by identifying the party that infringed, directly. How could they have missed that?

"In patent, direct infringement occurs when a person without authorization makes, uses, offers to sell or sells any patented invention within the United States or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefor. See 35 U.S.C. § 271."

"The U.S. law recognizes two types of indirect infringement: inducing infringement and contributory infringement. According to 35 U.S.C. § 271(b), inducement infringement is defined as "[w]hoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer." To find inducement, the Federal Circuit explains, the patentee must show that: (1) another person actually infringed; (2) the alleged inducer knew of the patent, and, nevertheless; (3) knowingly induced the infringing acts with a specific intent to encourage infringement by that person.[2]

On the other hand, contributory infringement occurs when: (1) there is a direct infringement; (2) the accused infringer knew its components were designed for a combination which was both patented and infringing; (3) the component has no substantial non-infringing uses; and (4) the component is a material part of the combination.[3] More importantly, the Federal Circuit further held that, unlike inducing infringement, the contributory infringement "has a territorial limitation requiring contributory acts to occur in the United States."[4]"