To my untrained eye, this ruling does not affect whether or not a patent holder was infringed upon only creates another step in proving the infringer did infringe with knowledge that it was infringing.....(now that is a sentence)

Pat Nunnally started his hunt for infringers by looking at those companies who had filed for and been granted patents on (whatever) In those patents were references to other patents to bolster their claim for a patent. (another great sentence)

PN started his list of possible EDig patent infringers on those companies that referred to EDig's patent in their filings for their own patent.

If this is the case I cannot see how a company cannot be accused of being a (willful infringer) since it knew of EDig's patents and had to know just what that patent meant and covered.

In any case EDig and DM are still on track for locating and filing against infringers whether willful or not and I am not sure if the filing of triple damages ever entered into EDig's or DM's plans.

It would seem that a patent infringer of any size would be more amenable to settling and licensing EDig's patents if not faced with a threat of triple damages and the payment of those licenses would still be extremely substantial...

JMO

 Frank