InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[revlis]

Newman should be well aware of the rules of evidence and her dissention is out of line.

Unless somebody could show us otherwise, I would agree with you.
Much of the hearing was and still is confidential so the public really do not know what arguments and evidence were part of the hearing. We can only know what is in the public record. The CAFC judges are privy to everything that is public and confidential. Newman in her dissent did not include it as part of the hearing, so we must conclude that it was not part of the hearing. That is why the other judges ruled against Nokia. Why Newman would argue against such a basic principle of law is anybody guess? Remember, in criminal cases, the rules are different.