So, in reading yesterdays Pacer Document - Defendant ARM’s Response to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend Preliminary I, I see statements from ARM like:

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

“Any delay in the trial schedule would merely spread unwarranted fear, uncertainty and delay to ARM’s customers and licensees.”

“Any delay in the trial schedule harms ARM”

“Delay thus becomes an advantage in Plaintiffs’ licensing campaign. The longer Plaintiffs can delay adjudication, the greater the possibility that companies will accept licenses merely because of the fear, uncertainty and delay factor.

“Timely resolution as provided by the Court’s existing schedule is the fairest manner in which to address Plaintiffs’ infringement charges.”

I would assume it is safe to say that ARM won’t be asking for a stay, either before or after the Markman?

GLTAL