Now we have Elysium's Reply on the supplemental summary judgment motion briefing. That means the summary judgment motions are now (once again) fully briefed and the Court is free to rule any time. Oral argument is set for January 13, but Judge Carney has consistently ruled before (and without) oral argument, so I would guess we will have hear from the Court in the first or second week of January.
Feel free to read the brief; I'm not going to go through it. I find numerous instances of the same rhetorical tricks and misrepresentations we have seen before. For example, Elysium claims that by narrowing the damages it seeks ChromaDex is "abandoning" those claims and was "unable to support" those claims, which is a misrepresentation. Similarly, Elysium mischaracterizes the evidence to try to show that it did not rely on the stolen cost information. It mischaracterizes ChromaDex's attempt to answer the Court's concerns as a "negotiation."
If the Court falls for any of this sophistry we'll take a look at what happened at that time, but I don't see a lot of value in preemptively addressing what will almost certainly be ignored by the Court when it rules.