The Calif court rejects our motion to use Higgins, which I presume leads to the eventual 50/50 deal with TPL. So what the Calif court denied PTSC, the defendants want to use against us.  Some sort of weird justice at work wouldn't you say? 

Thought we went over this long ago and came to a conclusion that there is no way the defendants can win this point.  Defendants still intent on trying, it appears. 

From the phone call it would appear that judge Ward was putting Higgins on the spot  <The witness will answer questions as to the accuracy of these documents. Witness will identify what is inaccurate. >  and I get the impression Higgins was trying to be very careful as to what he attests to or denies.  All IMO.  How did other see it?