I respectfully disagree with some posters who feel that the dialog today in court was about settlement. While that may be an impetus going on, it's not what Rosen/Walrath were talking about in court.
My analysis:
Looking at what the agenda was for today... and let's combine it with what we knew was going to be a heated battle about disclosure, etc.
The agenda had 8 of 10 items (under dispute going forward) directly related to document turnover or discovery. (Nos. 38,39,40,41,43,44,45,47)
THAT was the lion share on the agenda/table today. Documents and Disclosure. Period. {No matter how much we focused on the examiner, or the DS, the bulk of the items, 80% were about document turnover or discovery}
And combined with what THJMW had said in the past about "not trying the courts patience" about discovery matters.
Instead of having a puffery-based match among all the lawyers, all wanting to get on record, etc.
She pulled 'em in the back room and asked -- basically, "what's going on, was I not clear on what to turn over?"
"I told you to Meet and Confer, and I told you that the EC *is* your client, and now I've got this whole mess here." "What part of cooperate don't you understand?"
And, so, every last discovery/document item, plus the DS and Examiner, got pushed back to the 20th.
And a meeting is going on Monday. I'm sure that it is with a "new found" clarification of THJMW to "work it out" -- that is, discovery/document turnover.
Under that framework above, the statements in court make more sense.
{From Sleepless' transcript}
ROSEN:
"...hopefully these discussions that we're going to be having on Monday will yield an understanding with respect to the multitude of issues that we're adjourning today."
WALRATH:
"All right. And as I advised counsel if there is a resolution you can submit it to me and I'll consider it before the 20th. I understand we want to keep matters moving."
_______________
Then it becomes clear what was being talked about.
The "multitude of issues we're adjourning today " == the document / discovery motions
The "if there is a resolution" == a resolution to those document/discovery issues, and it can be documented and filed in court what that resolution is.
Sorry folks, not about settlement.
Not yet at least. Not the words we heard in court today.
IMHO
...Catz