"Case dismissed" is a fact.
But the court decided there is no "substantial similarity" between the two Tardigrade. The thing is: This is still just a decision.
It is entirely possible to accept the judge decided that way, and still disagree with the decision.
As I said: The judge was entirely correct in dismissing the case, simply based on the production timeline of both properties. Nevertheless, I do think both Tardigrades are "substantially" similar, in both concept and execution.
That's why I think putting a quote of this decision in the title is not a great way of handling things. It would be a good title for a new thread. But very much misses the point of what this whole discussion had been about the last 105 pages.