Gil, the judge was definitely not ready to rule on the 2 key claims in court. She brought up that the entire Markman was spent arguing the 2 key claims, and asked if both Parties wanted her to also rule on the remaining 6 claims.
Jameson said the Plaintiff would be OK with the 6 remaining claims being construed on their plain and ordinary meaning. Unless the defense wanted them ruled on. In that case, Jameson said Plaintiff's submitted written definitions will stand.
Mr. Cohen (Defendant attorney) said since so many defense lawyers weren’t present and he didn’t have enough time to contact all the defendants since they were all over the world, that unless the she ruled for the defendants on the 2 key claims, then the defense would want all claims ruled on.The judge said something like, “OK, if these 2 claims are ruled as dispositive to the case, I won’t rule on the other [6] claims.”
Plaintiff didn't object so I took it that they agreed the 2 key claims are dispositive of the case. Meaning, whoever wins them, wins the case. Now if the judge doesn't choose either Parties' claim construction, and construes the 2 key claims using her own language, I would imagine the case would continue on towards trial.
