You do not understand US Corporate Law. It has nothing to do with if AI Inc. said or did not say or prove in Washington, it never will. The action is filed in a different court against a different company. The only thing that that the present court can take into consideration is the present litigation facts. Under US law the company AI Inc. Washington does not exists. They may have closed because they where insolvent again under US law this is no problem as long as they stopped operating legally in Washington and start the new company legally.
The fact is the injunction being turned down is not a big deal. I will assume the AI Inc. is just wasting the litigants legal costs. This is about the source code to OS 4.0 and who owns it in the US only. The rights and privileges of a US company under US law is dictated by settled litigation and those legislations set precedence in the court. You can of course go to a court where it has no priors. But the settled litigations will come into effect.
In most instances in Corporate law there is no guilt or innocence only intent and effect.
I would also like to point out that US laws covering Copyright and Patents is different than every country in the world except Japan (a result of US occupation after WW2. Even if AI Inc. where to go bankrupt and be a non existent entity they would still retain there rights unless allocated by the courts at dissolution.
