We meet Robert Triffin once again. The case concerns a \($301.17\) check dated August 20, 2015, bearing the words “NOT VALID AFTER 180 DAYS.” The check was drawn against the bank account of TWC Administration, LLC. On August 24, 2015, Dymond Ottey cashed the check with Rio Check Cashers. Rio deposited the check, which the bank dishonored on August 27, 2015. On March 21, 2016, Rio assigned Triffin all its rights to payment. Triffin then sued TWC for \($832.04,\) the face value of the check plus costs and fees. TWC argues that Triffin has no standing because he is not a holder in due course and the check was stale. The court found Triffin to be a holder in due course; how did they rule on the staleness issue? Why?