InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[my3sons87]

IDCC opening statement in their brief.


1
I. INTRODUCTION
This Investigation has an unusually long and tortured history filled with
procedural actions designed by Respondents1 to delay and forestall a final Commission action
remedying their long-standing infringement. Now, after eight years of procedural machinations
and delay, and after remand proceedings before the Commission and the ALJ that included
Commission briefing, some six months of party and third party discovery and expert analysis, an
evidentiary hearing, briefing to the ALJ, and issuance of a remand ID (“RID”) finding
infringement by Respondents under the claim construction established in this Investigation,
Respondents seek yet again to avoid the consequences of their long-standing infringement by
asking the Commission to ignore the record established in this investigation and impose the
results reached by the Commission in other investigations. Specifically, Respondents ask the
Commission to impose (1) the construction reached in those other investigations that the words
of the critical claim limitation “successively transmits signals” should be construed together to
mean “transmits to the base station, one after the other, codes that are shorter than a regular
length code” and that short codes do not carry data and (2) that the accused devices do not meet
this limitation. But Respondents go to great lengths to obscure the fact that they never made any
of these arguments during the five years of pre-remand proceedings in this Investigation and
have therefore waived them. Nothing argued by Respondents concerning collateral estoppel,
stare decisis, or the alleged impact of the recent Supreme Court decision in Teva Pharm. USA,
Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 831, 840 (2015) overcomes this waiver