Actually, as I re-read this, this how it should go:

-hiQ sues LinkedIn for injunctive relief in the ND Cal., win on its CFAA claim.

-LinkedIn appeals to 9th Circuit, which sides with hiQ on CFAA claim

-hiQ loses its antitrust claims at the motion to dismiss stage

(somewhere in here hiQ goes out of business, but rich benefactor keeps paying its legal bills)

-LinkedIn continues with breach of contract and other claims, wins at motion to dismiss

-LinkedIn appeals to the Supremes, who vacates and remands back to 9th Circuit after Van Buren

-9th Circuit sides with hiQ a 2nd time on the CFAA claim

-injunction is dissolved

-hiQ suffers near-total defeat at summary judgment

-hiQ waves the white flag, agrees to permanent injunction agreeing to nearly all of LinkedIn's demands and pays LinkedIn 500k