Anything is possible, but what you propose is unlikely IMO. Even if the reply brief was filed tomorrow, there is no time frame in which the Federal Circuit must issue its ruling, and such often takes months, especially if there is to be oral argument as is common.
I do agree that Otteson's firm hasn't been "sitting on their hands". Remember, this isn't the only case they have ongoing. The likelihood is that the deadline for this brief came in conflict with something in one of those other cases --- this happens all the time, i.e., it isn't unusual at all for an extension to be requested.
Although outside the scope of your question, part of me actually hopes there is no agreement and that this case proceeds to a ruling by the Federal Circuit. That would, of course, present some risk (relatively small IMO) that the Federal Circuit might adopt the ITC's rationale. On the other hand, if the Federal Circuit chooses the Grewal rationale, not only would our position be strengthened overall, but we would be less likely to be be haunted in future cases due to the ITC ruling being cited by other opponents. In turn, a favorable Federal Circuit ruling would also be likely to strengthen our position in future licensing negotiations. Settlement of the present matter at this juncture would be the easy way out, but, as above, would leave the issues unresolved to at least some extent.
This is definitely a risk/reward kind of thing, but hey, we were forced to take the risk of going to trial and we prevailed, so I say let's see it through. And further, HTC may not have changed its stance anyway, thus requiring a Federal Circuit ruling just as it did in the trial court.
As always, we shall see.
