EDTA (was GIFT) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : EDTA (was GIFT)

EDTA 0.0000500

0.0%

Nov 14 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: GRC who wrote (1280)	9/5/1997 8:23:00 AM
From: Gerald Underwood	of 2383

GRC, Not having all of the data and witness testimony available, it is difficult to respond to the arguments made in reference to them per se, however IMO GIFT was valid in their approach to the defendents arguments. Defendents were not being responsive to the primary objective of claim construction. Certain statements in the brief I believe strengthen GIFT's argument. I guess my next question is will this further delay the proceedings if defendents have to back track to follow correct procedures or will proceedings continue with briefs as they are with the briefs being judged as invalid or unresponsive. And if so, how will could this affect the outcome? Also, could this further delay the proceedings, ie, now they may have to use additional time to respond to the claim construction. Seems to me that issues are becoming a little more ambiguous. Regards, Gerry

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next