There are 2 different and conflicting terms relating to expediting this.
MS wanted the case “expedited” - they wanted it to start earlier than 22/23 (pre-trial on the 15th June which was the day after this filing - not accepted by the court).
But MS also asked to extend the original 2 day hearing to 5 days minimum - obviously this is not expediting the PI judgement. That’s because MS wants to argue over the expert testimony now, feel their case is stronger that way and don’t want to wait until August.
So their call for expeditious treatment is actually to increase the amount of court time right now in hopes of avoid passing the July drop dead date.
But I have a feeling that growing this case will mean the judge has to take longer deliberating on all the evidence and risks pushing this past July 12 (the restraining order limit) and even 18 July.
And then there’s that Illumina/Grail situation. FTC claim that MS may close regardless of the CAT process in the UK and that forms the FTC’s “immediate harm” part of the injunction. MS will presumably argue they won’t do that and will abide by the laws in all jurisdictions.
At which point the FTC can withdraw this suit saying they’ll wait pending decisions in other jurisdictions as with Illumina. That would mean MS still doesn’t get a decision in the US and the FTC maintain the option to file a further PI suit with associated temporary restraining order if they have cause to believe MS will back track on their assurance before July 18.

