From a prior post.

<Just checked some of the stay proceedings and noted this part.

< It was not until February 4, 2009, that this Court Up until the filing of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Stay, Defendants had agreed, in writing, to dismiss the ‘584 patent from this case. However, Defendants subsequently reconsidered their position and have stated that they no longer intend to dismiss the ‘584 patent from this case. See Davis Declaration, denied Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration. [Dkt. No. 96]. >

A bit garbled but it would appear that we did want to get the 584 back in after dropping it. And apparently denied? Well, the fact that we wanted the 584 back in is good news to me. That at least answers the question of whether it still had teeth. YES!>

Opty