> The simplest explanation is the right one. [...]

Occam's actual razor is that the simplest explanation of competing theories is most likely the right one.

Occam's actual razor is Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate ("Never posit plurality without necessity").

Touché, mea culpa, et alia!

The story I heard is that most of these lawsuits are not being judged as BS on the merits (though some have). The majority are being thrown out using a variety of legal doctrines such as laches or standing. This is not necessarily unusual as court proceedings go, but the unfortunate side effect of doing this is that the ardent faithful will now have a lost-cause narrative to fall back on when everything else has been mowed clear.

I would prefer more of these cases to actually be tried so that they can be obliterated on the merits. Each case that is thrown out on a technicality is another tiny lilypad to stand on, and each case that is actually refuted is the removal of that pad.