<The fact that no report from a Special Master will include anything about settlement offers and negotiations is, as I have stated on several occasions now,>

Why do you continue to say that I said this. I never said that, so please stop saying that I said it.

< Rather, you stated that, as a precursor to agreeing to a Special Master, the parties would have agreed to a "sealed settlement',>

I didn't say that either. What I said was - "I would think that a necessary precursor to getting both sides to accept a Special Master, would be to have any settlement sealed. "

<and you also stated there would be a settlement before the Special Master made a report concerning the claims and/or alleged damages.>

I didn't say that either. What I said was - "the odds are extremely high that there would be a settlement prior to making those recomendations to the court. "

<Your opinions in that regard are abjectly, fully, 100%, completely and irrefutably wrong.>

I question whether you accurately understood what my opinion was. Certainly doesn't seems like it.

Opty