"In fact no delay was granted to either side, EDig's stay or Micron's stay."

Frank a joint motion to stay was denied prior to the hearing you attended.

Proposed:

4-15-2015 Full docket text for document 66:
Joint MOTION to Stay Pending Inter Partes Review of the Patent-In-Case by Micron Consumer Products Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Proof of Service)(Kay, Randall) (ag).

Denied:

4-16-2015 Full docket text for document 67:
Minute ORDER: On April 15, 2015, the parties filed a joint motion to stay the case pending inter partes review. (Doc. No. [66].) On February 5, 2015, the Court denied the Micron Defendants motion to stay the case pending inter partes review. (Doc. No. [51].) The Courts tentative ruling is to deny the joint motion to stay the case pending inter partes review for the same reasons stated in the Courts February 5, 2015 order. Trial is set for October 27, 2015, the Court issued its claim construction order on February 19, 2015, and the PTO has not yet decided whether to grant inter partes review of the 108 patent. Further, the deadline to amend pleadings was October 6, 2014. (13cv2889, Doc. No. 26.) Accordingly, the three factors relevant to granting a stay pending inter partes review weigh in favor of denying the parties motion. SeeNetlist, Inc. v. Smart Storage Systems, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116979, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2014). The Court schedules a telephonic conference with the parties for April 17, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. The Court will initiate the call. SO ORDERED on 4/16/2015 by Judge Marilyn L. Huff.(no document attached) (smy)

Everyone here had a concern as to why e.Digital agreed to file jointly on this matter. Thing is, (Kay, Randall) filed the motion with most likely nothing more than a nod from Handal. "Knock yourself out Kay, I'm trying to catch up with your "inequitable conduct" issue "

Anyway this is the only stay issue e.Digital was involved in....where it was denied on the 16th.

Rehash at the ARP-22nd hearing?

Anyway, the only issue to be amended, if approved, was defendants answer to complaint. They wanted to refashion their answer to e.Digitals complaint....or start over the case.

The judge, being put on the spot, acted fairly "without prejudice" on Microns behalf. If that leads into an appeal is anyones guess at this point.

I've come to the conclusion their is no winning in a court of law ...even with a fair judge. She has no idea if the merits Micron is presenting are real or not, however she must rule the benifit of doubt. The case is so far along does she start over? NO....the simplest fair patch is to rule "without prejudice" and kick it down the raod.

All Micron is doing is killing time...where IMO, the merits of the "inequitable conduct" are hogwash. Micron will move to an appeal based on the hogwash, if their civil case does not suit them....where we have no choice in the matter other than fight the hogwash.

doni