As above, except for rulings by the Court, announcements of settlement (should such occur), and probably a few other things that do not come to mind right now, Pacer filings are generally mundane, routine, and virtually meaningless in terms of the ultimate result in the case.  While reading such filings might be interesting to non-lawyers on a very basic level because it makes them feel that they are "in the know about" and "keeping up with" the case on some kind of "realtime" basis, the chances of finding that "pearl of wisdom" or "lynchpin" are virtually nil. 

Yet, I find continued extensions, unopposed extensions, to be a delay tactic.  WHY would TPL not oppose continued extension requests?  Isn't this the 3rd extension request, each for longer amount of time?  Of course we could speculate like you discussed ... oh they are running scared or TPL is in no hurry and is hoping for settlement, or ???

No matter what, it just doesn't make sense to allow continued extensions in my opinion.  I was hoping you could give some plausible explanations why we would not oppose these requests?  tia