InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 43
Posts 5056
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/02/2003

Re: None

Monday, 04/21/2014 6:57:35 PM

Monday, April 21, 2014 6:57:35 PM

Post# of 432451
TO ALL – Here is the 4/21/14 updated and corrected version of some of the important dates. I will mark as a sticky and hope to update as needed or when time is available. FYI the next time I post this, it will be shortened.

Below are some of my personal notes and dates, for those who are interested. If there are corrections please let me know, as I cannot guarantee that all are absolutely accurate. It is lengthy so take what you want and/or delete what you don't.

Here is a preliminary list of “some” of the important dates and events, both recent past and future.

Much of the information was obtained from the 2/24/14 10-K, EDIS filings, as well as posts from the board.
http://ir.interdigital.com/secfiling.cfm?filingid=1405495-14-10&CIK=1405495




PAST


Dec. 20, 2013 – ITC 337-800 - InterDigital filed in the Federal Circuit a petition for review seeking reversal of the Commission’s final determination.

Dec. 23, 2013 – CAFC 14-1176 - IDCC’s appeal of the 337-800 FD is docketed (both Nokia and ZTE were granted permission to intervene in the appeal, Samsung was denied.

Dec. 23, 2013 – ITC 337/800 & 868 - InterDigital and Huawei reached a settlement agreement to enter into binding arbitration to resolve their global patent licensing dispute. (Making them eligible for taking a PLA with the Signal Trust patents?)


Jan. 6, 2014 – ITC 337-868 IDCC responded to (Samsung’s motion of Dec. 12, 2013 to terminate the investigation as to U.S. Patent 7616970 (the ‘970 Patent) in view of the USITC’S determination in that case that the asserted claims of the ‘970 patent are not valid) and stated that, subject to its objection to the Commission’s final determination in the 337-TA-800 investigation and reserving its right to appeal that determination, InterDigital acquiesced to the termination of the 337-TA-868 investigation as to the ’970 Patent .

Jan. 6, 2014 – ITC 337-868 - the Commission’s Office of Unfair Import Investigations responded in support of the underlying legal analysis but stated that it would not support the motion in the form of a motion to terminate. (Where upon Samsung w/d the motion to terminate and on Jan. 9, moved for partial summary determination of no violation of Section 337 as to the ‘970 Patent

Jan. 13, 2014 – ITC 337-800 – IDCC filed a motion to terminate the investigation as to the LG respondents. No opposition was filed.

Jan. 15, 2014 - ITC 337-868 – The ALJ issued an ID finding that the ALJ is bound by the Commission’s determination in the 337-800 investigation and granting Samsung’s motion of Dec. 12, 2013 to terminate the investigation as to U.S. Patent 7616970 (the ‘970 Patent) in view of the USITC’S determination in the 337-800 that the asserted claims of the ‘970 patent are not valid.

Jan. 27, 2014 – ITC 337-868 – IDCC petitioned the USITC for review of the ID terminating the 337-868 investigation as to the ‘970 Patent.


Feb. 11, 2014 – ITC 337-868 – The USITC denied IDCC’s petition to review the ID (which now permits IDCC to appeal to the Federal Circuit.)

Feb. 11, 2014, - DE / CA No. 13-9 (ZTE) and CA No. 13-10 (NOK) - Delaware District Court Judge R. Andrews granted an InterDigital, Nokia, and ZTE stipulated *Amended Scheduling Order that bifurcated issues relating to damages, FRAND-related affirmative defenses, and FRAND-related counterclaims. (*stipulate: demand or specify (a requirement), typically as part of a bargain or agreement)

Feb. 12, 2014 – ITC 337/868 - the USITC determined not to review the initial determination terminating the Huawei Respondents from the 337-TA-868 investigation.

Feb. 12, 2014 – ITC 337/800 – The Commission granted IDCC’s Jan. 13, 2014 un-opposed motion to terminate the 337-800 investigation as to the LG Respondents
In terminating the 337-TA-800 investigation as to the LG Respondents the Commission adopted the ALJ’s determination that the ‘830, ‘636, ‘406, and ‘332 patents are not invalid. The Commission declined to take a position regarding InterDigital’s domestic industry or FRAND issues.
In doing so, the Commission determined certain issues and identified others that would be subject to further proceedings

Feb. 12, 2014 - ITC 337-613 - Order Remanding Investigation
the Commission remanded this investigation to the ALJ following a remand from the Federal Circuit. (See Order No. 45.) for limited remand proceedings, consistent with its February 12, 2014 opinion. The Commission defined the scope of the remand proceedings by enumerating the particular issues before the ALJ.
http://wirelessledger.com/337613_remand.pdf

Feb. 14, 2014 – ITC 337/613 – Order 45 (Requiring comments from the Parties Regarding the Proceedings on Remand
http://wirelessledger.com/337613_order45.pdf

Feb. 18, 2014 – ITC 337/868 - ORDER NO.109: REGARDING THE USE IN THIS INVESTIGATION OF THE COMMISSION’S RECENT OPINION IN INVESTIGATION . 337-TA-613
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=97458359

Feb. 24, 2014 - ITC 337/613 - Per Order #45 JOINT RESPONSE OF COMPLAINANTS, RESPONDENTS AND THE COMMISSION INVESTIGATIVE STAFF (Responses for each party to files their replies due Regarding the Proceedings on Remand (including “regarding “patent hold-up” OR reverse hold-up”) Microsoft and Qualcomm are both mentioned in the response)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=97786622&txt2find=order|45

Mar. 5, 2014 – ITC 337/613 - ORDER NO. 47: INITIAL DETERMINATION SETTING AN 18.5 MONTH TARGET DATE ON REMAND PURSUANT TO AGREEMENT BY THE PARTIES AND ORDER No. 48, setting the procedural schedule for the remand investigation.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=99450051&txt2find=47
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=97425977&txt2find=order|45

Mar. 7, 2014 – ITC 337-868 - JOINT OUTLINE OF THE ISSUES TO BE DECIDED IN THE FINAL INITIAL DETERMINATION (This is post hearing)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=98467889&txt2find=joint|outline
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=98467889

Mar. 12, 2014 - DE / CA No. 13-9 (ZTE) and CA No. 13-10 (NOK) Markman Hearing (Judge R. Andrews), release of Transcript Restriction set for Jun. 16, 2014

________________________

THE FOLLOWING 3 BULLETED ORDERS I DID NOT POST IN THEIR ENTIRETY AS THE GIST IS THE SAME IN ALL THREE. THE COURT IS TAKING THE POSITION THAT UNTIL THEY ARE DIRECTED OTHERWISE THEY WILL CONTINUE ON COURSE. Also important to remember here is that although the Delaware Court held their Markman Hearing on March 12, 2014 , it (the Supplemental Authority filing) was not submitted until Mar. 21, 2014 )

imo it is strange since they had already at this point in time had received the “first” remand from the CAFC in the 337-613. HOWEVER, look at what happened next, talk about “reverse hold-up”!
From the 10-K
On January 17, 2013 , the Federal Circuit issued its mandate remanding USITC Proceeding 337-TA-613 to the Commission for further proceedings. On February 4, 2013 , on remand from the Federal Circuit, the Commission issued an order requiring the parties to submit comments regarding what further proceedings must be conducted to comply with the

29

Federal Circuit's August 1, 2012 judgment, including whether any issues should be remanded to an ALJ to be assigned to this investigation. All parties filed initial responses to the Commission’s order by February 14, 2013 and reply responses by February 22, 2013 . On March 27, 2013 , Nokia filed a motion asking the Federal Circuit to recall its mandate, which the Federal Circuit denied on March 28, 2013 .
On May 10, 2013, Nokia filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court - No. 12 -1352. Briefs in opposition to Nokia’s petition were filed on September 9, 2013 , and Nokia filed its reply brief on September 23, 2013 . On October 15, 2013 , the Supreme Court denied Nokia’s petition for a writ of certiorari.
On February 12, 2014 , the Commission issued a notice, order and opinion remanding the investigation to an ALJ. In doing so, the Commission determined certain issues and identified others that would be subject to further proceedings by the ALJ[/color]
_______________________

• Mar. 14, 2014 – ITC 337-868 - PUBLIC VERSION of the confidential ruling of Feb. 24, 2014
OUII respectfully submits that InterDigital’s petition for review of the Judge’s February 5, 2014 Initial Determination Granting-In-Part Samsung’s Motion for Partial Summary Determination That It Does Not Infringe the Power Ramp-Up Patents should be denied.

In its petition for review, InterDigital acknowledges that the Judge found that he “is
bound by the Commission’s [claim construction] determination” and that InterDigital has filed a petition for review “purely to preserve InterDigital’s rights to appeal the Commission’s erroneous determination in the 800 Investigation and, to the extent it formed the basis for the ALJ’s determination of noninfringement, the effects of that determination in this investigation.”
Compls.’ Pet. at 2-3.
OUII submits that no review is necessary, as the Judge’s initial determination was correctly decided. The Commission’s construction of the limitation “successively sends transmissions” in Inv. No. 337-TA-800 is binding on the Judge in this investigation unless and until it is modified by the Commission or the Federal Circuit. See Certain Integrated Circuits, Chipsets, and Products Containing Same Including Televisions, Inv. No. 337-TA-822, Order No. 17 at 4-5 (Aug. 6, 2012) (“While Freescale may certainly appeal the Commission’s final determination in the 786 Investigation and may ultimately succeed in overturning a finding of invalidity of the ’455 Patent, the Commission’s finding of invalidity is binding on the ALJ absent a decision to the contrary by the Commission or the Federal Circuit.”). The Judge correctly found that the accused Samsung devices in this investigation cannot meet the “successively sends
transmissions” limitation under the Commission’s claim construction and analysis. See Order 96 at 9-10. OUII submits that this finding is neither a “conclusion of material fact” that is “clearly erroneous,” nor “a legal conclusion [that] is erroneous, without governing precedent,
_____

1 The Judge denied Samsung’s motion for summary determination of noninfringement with regard to two other asserted patents, U.S. Patent Nos. 7,190,966 and 7,296,847. Order No. 96 at 10-11.

3
rule or law, or constitutes an abuse of discretion[.]” 19 C.F.R. § 210.43(b)(1) (2013). Nor is it a determination “affecting Commission policy.” Id. Accordingly, there are no valid grounds for review of the Judge’s initial determination.
OUII further submits that there is no reason why the Commission should elect to revisit its claim construction determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-800. It is true that an agency “is free to change prior rulings and decisions so long as such action is not done capriciously or arbitrarily.” Certain NAND Flash Memory Circuits and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-526, USITC Pub. No. 3970, Comm’n Op. at 4 (Dec. 2007) (quoting 5 Jacob A. Stein, Administrative Law 0 40.02 (2005);
Mem. from General Counsel to the Comm’n, “The Status of an Unreviewed Initial Determination,” GC-G-306 (Nov. 28, 1983)). OUII submits, however, that it would be arbitrary to construe the same claim limitation in the Power Ramp-Up Patents one way in December and another way in February, unless the Commission were directed to do so by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. While InterDigital has appealed the Commission’s determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-800, see Compls.’ Pet. at 2, the Court has not yet issued an opinion in that case, and there have been no recent
developments in Federal Circuit law that would bear on the Commission’s claim construction determination.
There is no reason, therefore, for the Commission to second-guess its construction of the “successively sends transmissions” limitation less than three months after issuing its final determination in Inv.No. 337-TA-800.

4
For these reasons, OUII respectfully submits that InterDigital’s petition for review of the Judge’s February 5, 2014 Initial Determination should be denied.

• Mar. 14, 2014 - ITC 337-868 - PUBLIC VERSION of the confidential ruling of Feb. 7, 2014
Office of Unfair Import Investigations’ Response to Complainants’ Petition for Review of the Initial Determination Granting Samsung’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Noninfringement with Respect to Patent No. 7,502,406
OUII submits, however, that it would be arbitrary to construe the same claim limitation in the ’406 patent one way in December and another way in February, unless the Commission were directed to do so by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. While InterDigital has appealed the Commission’s determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-800, see Compls.’ Pet. at 1-2, the Court has not yet issued an opinion in that case, and there have been no recent developments in Federal Circuit law that would bear on the Commission’s claim construction determination. There is no reason, therefore, for the Commission to second-guess its construction of the “power control bit” limitation less than two months after issuing its final determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-800.
For these reasons, OUII respectfully submits that InterDigital’s petition for review of the Judge’s January 24, 2014 Initial Determination should be denied.

• Mar. 14, 2014 - ITC -337
-868 - PUBLIC VERSION of the confidential ruling of Feb. 3, 2014
Office of Unfair Import Investigations’ Response to Complainants’ Petition for Review of the Initial Determination Granting Samsung’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of No Violation with Respect to Patent No. 7,616,970

OUII submits, however, that it would be arbitrary to find the same claims of the ’970 patent invalid in December and valid in February, unless the Commission were directed to do so by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. While InterDigital has appealed the Commission’s determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-800, see Compls.’ Pet. at 1-2, the Court has not yet issued an opinion in that case, and there have been no recent developments in Federal Circuit law that would bear on the Commission’s determination that claims 1-18 of the ’970 patent are invalid. There is no reason, therefore, for the Commission to second-guess its invalidity determination less than two months after issuing its final determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-800.
For these reasons, OUII respectfully submits that InterDigital’s petition for review of the Judge’s January 15, 2014 Initial Determination should be denied.
________


Mar. 19, 2014 - SCOTUS/LG No. 13-796 - Responses to LG’s petition for a writ of certiorari seeking reversal of the CAFC ruling that they are not entitled to arbitration, (in the ITC 337/800) are due
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=99092652

Mar. 21, 2014 - ITC 337/613 – IDCC submitted Notice of Supplemental Authority regarding the 966 and 847 patents per DE Judge Andrews claim construction hearing from the previous week .
Subsequently, Judge Andrews ruled from the bench that he expects
to construe the three disputed terms as InterDigital had suggested and as follows:
• “code” means “a sequence of chips or bits” (id. at 61:19-22);

• “generated” means “produced” (id. at 62:1-2); and

• “successively transmitted signals” means “successively transmits
sequences of chips or bits” (id. at 62:3-5).

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=99240848&txt2find=supplemental|authority
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=99340784&txt2find=delaware|transcript

Mar. 24, 2014 - ITC 337/613 - Revised Notice of Commission Determination to Remand Investigation to the Chief Administrative Law Judge Pursuant to Remand from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=99580555&txt2find=initial|determination|remand


Apr. 1, 2014 - ITC 337/613 - ITC Issues Public Version Of Revised Opinion Remanding Investigation
The Commission reviewed the ID and on October 16, 2009 issued a notice modifying the ALJ’s construction of the term “access signal” in the asserted claims of the ‘847 and ‘004 patents. The Commission also reviewed and took no position on the ALJ’s construction of the term “synchronize” in the asserted claims of the ‘847 patent. Further, the Commission took no position on validity with respect to any of the asserted patents and did not review the ALJ’s construction of the terms “code” and “increased power level” in the asserted claims of the ‘966 and ‘847 patents. See our October 19, 2009 post for more details.
InterDigital appealed the Commission’s final determination, specifically regarding the unreviewed constructions of the “code” and “increased power level” limitations. The Federal Circuit reversed the Commission’s construction of these terms, reversed the Commission’s determination of non-infringement as to the ‘966 and ‘847 patents, and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings. Nokia subsequently filed a petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc on the issue of domestic industry which the Court denied. See our August 3, 2012 and January 14, 2013 posts for more details on the Federal Circuit’s rulings.
On February 12, 2014, the Commission issued a notice and order remanding the investigation to the Chief ALJ for assignment to a presiding ALJ. According to the March 26, 2014 revised opinion, on February 24, 2014, Nokia filed a petition for reconsideration of the Commission’s order remanding the investigation. The Commission issued its revised opinion in response to Nokia’s petition.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=99957202&txt2find=initial|determination|remand

Apr. 2, 2014– Apple Arbitration – Per OD: because Apple did not oppose the award, the April 4 hearing was canceled, and on April 2 the judge issued an order and a judgment confirming the award, and closed the case.

Apr. 7, 2014 - InterDigital and Fujitsu Limited Agree to Worldwide Patent License Agreement (Making them eligible for the “Signal Trust”?)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100146886

Apr. 8, 2014 - Nokia wins Chinese approval for Microsoft deal
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/08/us-nokia-microsoft-china-idUSBREA370DH20140408
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100248051

Apr. 9-10, 2014 - 5th annual LTE Innovation Summit, Del Mar, CA
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=99855450

Apr. 14, 2014 – CAFC 14-1419 /337-868 - IDCC files appeal for review of the initial determination terminating the investigation based on the ITC ruling of summary or partial summary judgments) that certain patents were not infringed, based on the 613 FD. (Patents involved are the 970, 406 and the power ramp-up patents)

Apr. 17, 2014 – ITC 337-613R: First Settlement Conference delayed
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER RE: FIRST SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE -
Per Order No. 48 (Setting Procedure Schedule on Remand), the First Settlement conference scheduled to occur by April 18, 2014, with a joint report on the settlement conference due on April 23, 2014. Due to the holiday, Nokia was unable to participate in either of the dates suggested by InterDigital on April 12, 2014. The parties have agreed, however, that the First Settlement Conference will take place on Wednesday, April 23, 2014, and that the Joint Report on the First Settlement Conference will be submitted to the ALJ on April 28, 2014. snip
the parties would like to conduct the First Settlement Conference telephonically, and request the ALJ’s consent to do so.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100774969&txt2find=nokia

Apr. 18, 2014 – CAFC 14-1176 (337/800) Case now classified as a confidential case (per phone conversation)

Apr. 18, 2014 – SCOTUS LG No. 13-796 – Calendared for Conference
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=99929744&txt2find=scotus

Apr. 18, 2014 – ITC 337-868 – INITIAL DETERMINATION - Extending the Target Date - to June 13, 2014 (“Any extension of the target date beyond 16 months, before the investigation is certified to the Commission, shall be by initial determination”)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=100801772

Apr. 18, 2014 - InterDigital Announces Date for First Quarter 2014 Financial Results – which is BMO on May 1, 2014 (a bit later than usual)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100795867

Apr. 18, 2014 - ITC 337/613R: Remand - First settlement conference – Delayed on Apr. 17, 2014 to Apr. 23, 2014
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100774969&txt2find=nokia

Apr. 21, 2014 - Motorola Solutions and Microsoft Sign a Patent Deal – Affecting Android and Chrome OS. http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100893646

Apr. 21, 2014 – SCOTUS 13-796 LG ELECTRONICS, INC., ET AL. V. INTERDIGITAL COMM, LLC, ET AL. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit with instructions to dismiss the case as moot. See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U. S. 36 (1950).
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100863317





FUTURE

Pending:

• Closing of the Nokia/Microsoft deal (end of April?)

• More info on the 10/17/13 - Signal Trust (Cellular Infrastructure Patents)

• CAFC 14-1419 /337-800 – The ruling from IDCC’s 12/20/2013 filing for review seeking reversal of the Commission’s final determination (using judgments based on the 613 investigation, which were later overturned by the CAFC)

• CAFC/337-868 – The ruling from IDCC’s 4/14/14 filing for review of the ITC rulings of summary or partial summary judgments (based incorrectly) on the 613 FD, that certain patents were not infringed.

• Apple PLA renewal

• Intel’s XMM 7260 platform will be used in products by the end of June.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2102340/new-chipsets-and-devices-lay-groudwork-for-lteadvanced.html



Apr. 23, 2014 - ITC 337/613R: Remand - Submission of first settlement conference joint report – Delayed until Apr. 28, 2014
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100774969&txt2find=nokia

APR. 25, 2014 - Nokia-Microsoft Deal to Close Friday, With a Couple Tweaks
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100872032

Apr. 28, 2014 – ITC 337-613R: Nokia Joint Report on the First Settlement Conference will be submitted to the ALJ
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100774969&txt2find=nokia



May 1, 2014 - IDCC to report First Quarter 2014 Financial Results - BMO
InterDigital executives will host a conference call that same day at 10:00 a.m. ET
For telephone access to the conference, call 800-768-6563 within the U.S. or 785-830-7991 from outside the U.S. Please call by 9:50 a.m. ET on May 1 and ask the operator for the InterDigital Financial Call.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100795867

May 12, 2014 - ITC 337/868 - ALJ.s previously scheduled ID extended to Jun. 13, 2014
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=100801772

May 22, 2014 - CAFC 14-1176 – IDCC appeal of ITC 337/800 (IDCC’s petition to review, and seeking reversal of the Commission’s FD - Appellee’s (ITC) brief due
(14-1176 is now classified as a confidential case)

May 23, 2014 - ITC 337/613R: Remand - File identification of expert witnesses, including their expertise and curriculum vitae


June 2014 - Apple PLA expires

Jun. 12, 2014 – IDCC ASM will be held at 11:00 a.m. ET at the DoubleTree Hilton Hotel Wilmington located at 4727 Concord Pike, Wilmington, Delaware.
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=61365163

Jun. 13, 2014 – ITC 337-868 – Final Initial Determination - extended date for the new target date, due no later than the close of business.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=100801772

Jun. 16, 2014 – DE/ CA No. 13-009 (ZTE) and CA No. 13-0010 (NOK) Release of Transcript Restriction from the 3/12/14 Markman Hearing
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=99171720&txt2find=june|16


Jul. 15, 2014 - Intel plans to report its earnings for the second quarter of 2014

Jul. 18, 2014 - ITC 337/613R: Remand - Parties serve responses to contention interrogatories on the issues for which that party bears the burden


Aug. 2, 2014 - ITC 337/868 – Canceled - FD extended deadline (Filed on 11/22/2013) – now moot due to the extension granted on Apr. 18, 2014
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100802712

Aug.11, 2014 - ITC 337/613R: Remand - Parties serve responses to contention interrogatories on the issues for which the opposing party bears the burden

Aug. 29, 2014 - ITC 337/613R: Remand - Fact discovery cutoff and completion


Sept. 5, 2014 - DE 13-0011/Samsung - Joint Claim Construction Brief due

Sept. 5, 2014 - ITC 337/613R: Remand - Deadline for motions to compel discovery
Sept. 5, 2014 - ITC 337/613R: Remand - Second settlement conference
Sept. 10, 2014 - ITC 337/613R: Remand - Submission of second settlement conference joint report

Sept. 10, 2014 – ITC 337/868 – Target Date Postponed - Previously scheduled Commissions FD (ext. Oct. 18, 2013, and again on Apr. 18, 2014 to Oct.14, 2014.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100802712

Sept. 12, 2014 - ITC 337/613R: Remand - Exchange of initial expert reports

Oct. 14, 2014 - ITC 337/868 – Commissions Target Date (extended on Oct. 18, 2013 and again on Apr. 18) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100802712

Oct. 15, 2014 - DE 13-0011/Samsung – Markman hearing for covered patents asserted against Samsung at 8:30 AM in Courtroom 6A before Judge Richard G. Andrews



2015

FCC to go ahead with spectrum auction in mid-2015
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2014/04/18/FCC-to-go-ahead-with-spectrum-auction-in-mid-2015/7851397851081/

Jan. 26, 2015 – ITC 337-613R: Pre-trial conference and tutorial
Jan. 26 – 30, 2015 – ITC 337-613R: Trial 1/26-1/30/15

Apr. 20, 2015 - C.A. No. 13-010 (DE) - IDCC and NOK 5 day jury trial begins

Apr. 27, 2015 – ITC 337/613R: Remand ID

May 11, 2015 – DE/ C.A. No. 13-009 (/ZTE) 5-day jury trial beginning at 9:30 a.m.

May 29, 2015 – DE/ C.A. 13-0011/Samsung - A Pretrial Conference at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 6A before Judge Richard G. Andrews.

Jun. 13, 2014 – ITC 337-868 extended date for the Final Initial Determination date has
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=100801772

Jun. 15, 2015 – DE/ C.A. No. 13-0011 (SAM) 5-day jury trial beginning at 9:30 a.m.

Jun. 26, 2015 – ITC 337-613R: One of two dates possible for the completion of the RFD (the other date is 8/28/15)

Aug. 28, 2015 – ITC 337-613R: Remand Target Date/FD - (18.5 months)

"Genius is eternal patience".......Michaelangelo

Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent IDCC News