The Markman was for the purpose of determining construction term definitions, not validity.. the Plaintifs submitted the definitions they wanted with written arguments, the Defense submitted theirs with written aruguments, and then there was a hearing with Judge Ward, so he could ask final questions of the two sides before determining which definition he decided best interpretted each claim.  As it was, it appears TPL/PTSC's definitions were chosen nearly accross the board for the '336 & '148 patents, while the 584 patent claim 29, I believe, was found for the defense (Arm).. this is why PTSC successfully released Arm  & the 584 patent from this litigation.. so they could concentrate on the remaining Js and the strong 336 & 148 patents (and attempt appeal of that single claim def of the 584).  The patents are considered valid until otherwise proven in court, as the Js will attempt to prove (if we get to court) or by the USPTO in the upcoming re-examination (at which the Js will not be present)

corrections welcomed