Things aren't necessarily as dismal as you portray.
First, I don't know many "illustrious" lawyers, but Otteson has done a good job so far. Despite the fact, as you indicate, that he didn't prevail in the ITC, that was due to the Judge's different construction of the Markman ruling --- Otteson was able to obtain a better construction from Judge Grewal in the NDCA, which was at least partially responsible for the denial of the MSJ that would have gutted our case. No lawyer wins them all, but it seems to me that Otteson is doing pretty well.
Second, the jurors in the NDCA likely won't be "eighth graders", and will probably be pretty much the opposite. The NDCA sits in heart of Silicon Valley, where most jurors will likely be well educated and will likely have considerable expsoure to, and knowledge of, technology and related issues. Actually, although I like sophisticated jurors, a persuasive argument could be made that our side might actually prefer "eighth graders", for whom there would be less chance of any indirect connection to, or ideology with, the large technology companies that employ a considerable amount of the work force in the local area.
In the future, you might want to step back a bit and think about what you plan to assert before putting it in writing. We're probably not the "favorite child" in this litigation, but we're not the stepchild either.
