Where is the line telling that a litigation is basically a bullying tool for a patent holder? Accusing party is providing software patent infringement arguments that are laughable to one skilled in art but sounds legit to a lawyer. A simple example is infringement chart construction by accusing party including blunt terminology misinterpretation - obviously a work of a lawyer or a council not someone skilled in art. The position of accusing party is filled with examples like this. Is there a way of showing the case is a fraud?