If the SkunK were writing this for the Defense, he would have inserted "alleged" in the following quote: Otherwise it appears that Cardinal admits that there is a "patent infringement issue" - a surprising assertion for the defense: ". . . to resolve the very same patent infringement issue." 1stPara, page 3 Shouldn't they be arguing that there is "no patent infringement issue" rather than admitting that there "is" an issue here with patent infringement? Once you admit a crime took place - what does the defense have left? Somebody else did it? Not being a lawyer, I obviously am missing something here . . . Maybe this is what they call a gambit -it is surely a clever stratagem - 'cause I cannot fathom what they gained by admitting there is an issue with patent infringment . . .
Here is an interesting short: ". . . the pending motions in Kansas have been fully briefed, and a resolution of those motions is imminent."
Here is Cardinal's Reply
or try this secondary link
SkunK
PS Happy Easter and Happy Passover to all . . .
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
Aloha Skunk but it seems the link is unavailable. Can you re-post the link of give me directions on how to access. Thank you.
By the way thank you for the information you provide on your site it is extremely informative and insightful.
I put in a secondary link. Hope that helps. Anyone can follow setting up an account with Pacer at
https://pacer.login.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/login.pl?court_id=00idx
or at RFC EXPRESS at
http://www.rfcexpress.com/search.asp
Might have to copy/paste in the link
Post a Comment