My father was a law clerk for a Federal Judge who sat on the 9th Circuit panel back in the 70s. I discussed the SFOR situation with him yesterday. He likened it to a trademark case in which he personally helped draft the 9th Circuit's opinion. It had come up from a district judge, who had only a handful of very inexperienced attorneys as his clerks. My father basically said, the reality of the situation is this; District Court judges have very limited time and resources. They have dockets a mile long, and they generally don't give two sh*ts about cases that aren't criminal cases. They focus their time and resources on putting drug dealers, child molesters, bank robbers, and other federal criminals behind bars. If they have any time left over, they use it on high-dollar civil matters that usually involve the US government. Intellectual property cases are so low on their hierarchy list, most of them will give such cases only the slightest bit of attention, and essentially PRESUME they will have their decisions appealed to the Federal District Court, where the judges have more expertise regarding intellectual property.

With that knowledge, the fact SFOR's case was dismissed by Judge Kronstadt (sp?) was almost a foregone conclusion. The guy just wanted it off his desk. That would explain the utter lack of any real legal analysis in his decision to grant summary judgement.

IMO, we are going to win this appeal. This HP case ZPaul posted is almost a procedural carbon copy of SFOR's case. I don't see how SFOR will not be granted a remand back to the District Court, with instructions to determine the factual issues, at the LEAST. In fact, in light of SCOTUS validating the decisions of the PTAB, I would not even be surprised if the Fed. District remanded with instructions to find in favor of SFOR, because SCOTUS's decision essentially predetermines the outcome of any such fact-finding procedure.

In other words, I wish I had more money. And BTW, yes, my Dad did buy some SFOR shares.