She meant (of course) "Armed with that decision and evidence of actionable wrong-doing...".
See, without that pesky old evidence that someone has done something wrong in Linux they're
going to have a hard old time pursuing damages against end-users. Now you'd think that in the
1000 years or so that this lawsuit has been going on that they would somewhere have uncovered
some of that evidence but so far they haven't produced any in court in spite of their many
public claims.