Strength of the defense.

I'd be surprised if the overreaching on damages was much effect to the jury on their decisions (underimpressed the judge, of course, who apparently is really quite good and aware of the problem of how to apportion damages.

Having prepared (at least some) of the materials used in the defense, I believe the materials were very strong indeed; this is reflected by the decision which was both on non-infringement and invalidity.

The patents were taken out by Xerox for their rooms work in an era that the patent office was even less clue full about prior art than now; the trolls who ended up with them were trying to cast a wide net (another sign of greed).

So I don't think it reflects very much on the decision: as PJ put it, the "cherry on top" was the judge, who also had already limited damages, long before the jury decision came back.