Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
The last time I heard, the court permits, or does not permit the review and/or copying of trial documents.
Make that a double, bartender.
As I recall, the mediation only lasted for a few days, and a bill for $4,700 was submitted to the parties.
PACER reported that the mediation report was filed on the same day of the trial, October 7th.
Thanks for clearing up a long-standing question.
The jury may have been inflamed. But Ericy will have a hard time convincing anyone that it wasn't Joran Hoff and his merry band who did so.
Now you know what happens when someone like me gets his hands on a copy of Blacks Law Dictionary. LOL.
Watching Judge Judy doesn't hoit.
I'd like to hear more about increasing the Harris award.
If reports are true that Harris was only asking $17 million, the $61 million is 3.5 times that amount, excluding
interest, legal fees, and costs.
Despite the unexpected award, under normal circumstances, would a judge, in good conscience, simply ignore the disastrous testimony and exhibits discovered by JK, Ghors and Chartex?
Eighteen years of Ericy thumbing its nose at a legitimate patent holder, not to mention the U.S. legal system, may count for something.
When Jim started the new board, he came to Yahoo and asked us to join, so we wouldn't have to put up with the "Idiots" on our board.
We don't see the idiot messages on Yahoo because most of us have them on Ignore.
Why some on this board continually respond to Once is, frankly, beyond our comprehension.
No. The motions in limine were extended to January 13, with responses due by January 21.
Desert Dweller.
Key dates up to trial. I want to read
by: tfwg2000 (44/M/13milesfromKingofPrussia)
Long-Term Sentiment: Strong Buy 01/06/03 10:33 am
Msg: 135822 of 137808
report "B"
By: brokentrade
13 Jul 2002, 02:25 AM EDT Msg. 100173 of 119498
Text of Court's Scheduling Order
THE COURT'S SCHEDULING ORDER
The Court hereby establishes the following schedule for this case. This Scheduling Order supercedes all prior Scheduling Orders entered in this case.
1. This case is set for Jury Trial on February 10, 2003.
2. Counsel must file by noon, January 6, 2003, a Joint Pretrial Order [not to exceed twenty (20) pages] containing the information required by Local Rule 16.4 plus the following:
A. A list of witnesses who may be called by each party in its case in chief. Each such witness list shall contain a brief narrative summary of the testimony to be elicited from each witness, shall state whether the witness has been deposed, and whether the witness' trial testimony is "probable", "possible", "expert", or "record custodian". A copy of this list must be furnished to the court reporter on the day of trial.
B. A report as to the status of settlement negotiations as of the date of the Pretrial Order.
C. Trial briefs may be filed with the Pretrial Order, but are not required unless specifically requested by the Court.
The Joint Pretrial Order will control all subsequent proceedings in this case.
3. Daubert objections to expert witnesses, if any, must be filed by noon, October 7, 2002.
4. Parties are DIRECTED to exchange live lay witness lists containing no more than twenty (20) witnesses no later than noon, November 4, 2002. The witness lists shall include short descriptions of the general subject matter of each witness' testimony, and the parties shall have until noon, December 18, 2002, to depose any lay witnesses not previously deposed in this action.
5. Parties are further DIRECTED to exchange exhibits, deposition designations, exhibit lists, and otherwise comply with the requirements of Local Rule 26.2 no later than noon, December 3, 2002. Parties must exchange cross-designations of depositions and file any objections to exhibits no later than noon, January 6, 2003.
6. Requested jury instructions (annotated) and interrogatories must be filed no later than noon, January 6, 2003. Proposed instructions may be submitted on a labeled 1.4-meg. Diskette, in WordPerfect format, in additions to the required written form.
7. Motions in limine and requested voir dire must be filed by noon, January 6, 2003. Responses to Motions in limine must be filed by noon, January 16, 2003.
SO ORDERED.
DATED: July 8, 2002.
At the moment, Bid/Ask is imbalanced at 15.92--15.75, 1,500 shares already traded.
With so much focus on the new trial date, we could close above yesterday's price, if investors realize that nothing has changed except the date.
Clarence. I too thought we'd go to trial, but now rate it at about 30/70.
Judge Lynn knows this has been going on for 18 years, and must be a little upset with some of the Harris testimony, even though she's honor bound to be unbiased.
Given her reported rising star, wouldn't you think she could be taking a treble-cautious approach, so it doesn't get dumped back in her lap?
Ranger
by: loophole73 (M/Texas) 01/15/03 06:50 pm
Msg: 137690 of 137695
I am tapped out out on IH. Would you post to Spree and Loch that I do not know for sure, but they should look at post 2782 and draw their own conclusions.
loop
Red. Damn. I forgot about Louie. But at least I won't have to be concerned about settlement while I'm gone.
Little thought: If Judge Lynn gets around to deciding on Harris in the meantime, we could get a lift back up.
Loop. If we can boil it down to either (1) a court overload (3,100 exhibits/catching up), or (2) an "order" to "settle this damn thing or I'll be tough on you in May", this would be easier to take.
Obviously, she's already seen the movie "Harris and the Smoking Guns" once, and doesn't like Westerns.
Can you think of any other possibilities that makes sense?
Yahoo board is quoting bids of 13.48 in AHT.
Judge Lynn did the same thing with Harris. The trial was scheduled for February and, a few days later, it was switched to October 7.
F&J overloaded Ericy by dumping 3,100 exhibits on McKool, and may have stubbed its toe. Allowing one minute to examine each exhibit would take 8 days alone, which may have been justification for Ericy to cry on Judge Lynn's shoulder.
Like others, I'd like to think she told them to get their act together by May 15, because the whole case stinks to the high heavens.
She saw the smoking guns with Harris, and doesn't need to see it twice.
Yes. I think it only lasted about 14 court days.
As you may recall, they were not full weeks of trial for Harris.
Harris started on October 7. Jury verdict on October 29.
Mschere. The court reports that the trial is scheduled for four weeks.
Ams. Could it have something to do with the fact that the DOW is down 120 points, and the NAZ is down 20, after a positive open?
Kevin. If true, Ericy may have also passed the hat.
PACER: IDCC.
by: laranger_2 (73/M/Milford, MI) 01/14/03 02:28 pm
Msg: 137320 of 137332
Fightin' all the way to the end:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
1/13/03 722 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in sealed area (svc)
[Entry date 01/14/03]
1/13/03 723 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in sealed area (svc)
[Entry date 01/14/03]
1/13/03 724 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in sealed area (svc)
[Entry date 01/14/03]
1/13/03 725 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in sealed area (svc)
[Entry date 01/14/03]
1/13/03 726 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in sealed area (svc)
[Entry date 01/14/03]
1/13/03 727 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in sealed area (svc)
[Entry date 01/14/03]
1/13/03 728 MOTION by plaintiff Ericsson Radio, plaintiff Ericsson-GE
Mobile to extend the page limitation on its motions in
limine and arguments in support. (3) (cxb)
[Entry date 01/14/03]
1/13/03 729 UNOPPOSED MOTION by defendant Interdigital Communications,
defendant Interdigital Technology to extend the page
limitation for motion in limine and brief in support
thereof. (2) (cxb) [Entry date 01/14/03]
1/13/03 730 ORDER granting [728-1] Ericsson Inc.'s motion to extend the
page limitation on its motions in limine and arguments in
support. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn) Copies to
counsel: 1/14/03 Page(s) 1 (cxb) [Entry date 01/14/03]
[END OF DOCKET: 3:93cv1809]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
BT. Motions in limine were extended to January 13, and were probably filed as two sealed documents on that date.
I believe the responses are due by the 21st.
If the contents of certain depositions and other evidence comes to public attention at trial, resulting in an adverse ruling for Ericy and tanking/downgrading of Ericy's stock, three wet hornets will be buzzing around Stockholm.
1. PWC, which did not discover the evidence.
2. Investment bankers who wrote the prospectus for the Rights Issue.
3. Class action lawyers who are looking for their next targets.
If Ericy doesn't settle........they might be well advised to keep their phone off the hook.
If you think IH can't move markets, take a look at premarket trading of 18,200 shares.
Although Wall Street was dubious about the first press release by JK, et al, they apparently like the second.
We may not move up today. But does it really matter any more?
Kevin. Are you saying that Ericy had a records retention policy, but memos admittedly written by employees that "the patent cannot be successfully attacked...and should be licensed", are missing from Ericy's files?
Boo. That was some Hail Mary. Right thru the uprights, did a one eighty, and back into the receiver's hands. LOL.
Was this worth waiting for? You damn betcha.
Boo. Them ain't apples. That was our Hail Mary, and they put it right through the uprights!!!!!!!!!!
Kevin. The last three pages were just faxed. The first page is too blurred. But you can see my typed copy on Yahoo message #127516, and #127517.
How long did it take you to type that one, Once?
I can take Tecee's smart-mouth actions, even though he crossed the line to trash-mouth tonight.
I can take SJRatty, even though he's overbearing, trying to work his way onto the board with legal revelations, and questionable posts.
But seeing you again after two years is to view humanity as its worst. We predicted on Yahoo that the new board would be fine, as long as you didn't show up. And we were right.
I've been waiting patiently like everyone else, for a real human being to start posting on more IDCC exhibits. JK, Chartex and another spent the whole day working for the board in a totally unselfish manner, which would never cross your twisted mind.
And as I wait, my little dog Oso sits at my side, dealing with cancer and a crippled leg. But I wouldn't give one hair on his head to save you from your eventual undoing.
This post won't stop you. But Judge Lynn and the jury in Dallas will.
Have a good day.
Jim. The first letter means "Business". I believe the second has to do with innovation.
XDX. The support for "rush".
Under "General": "If we do not SIGNIFICANTLY (my caps) step up our patent activities we risk paying the same order for many products. This would mean costs of several hundred MSEK per year."
Under "Goals": "Tentatively the goal is during 1995 to apply for the following number of patents in relation to Motorola:
Cellular/PCS----100%
Mobile Data-----100%
Under "Strategies": "Create an awareness and an understanding of the importance of patent questions. This will mean a COMPLETELY NEW CULTURE!"
Under "Strategies": "Based on this, SOONEST build an adequate patent portfolio, mainly through own R&D, but also through acquiring patents and licences."
1/10/03 -- Tele-conference held. (cxb) [Entry date 01/13/03]
1/10/03 719 Minute order: telephone conference held before Judge
Barbara M. G. Lynn. Court reporter: Sue Engledow. A
telephone conference was held with the parties during which
the issue of alignment & the trial setting was discussed.
Order to enter. (1) (cxb) [Entry date 01/13/03]
1/10/03 720 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in sealed area (svc)
[Entry date 01/13/03]
1/10/03 721 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in sealed area (svc)
[Entry date 01/13/03]
[
Red. I had to type the Hoff memo because it was faxed, with poor quality. As a result, I didn't type the whole memo, much of which had nothing to do with "astronomical liabilities."
It was faxed to me on November 12, and was posted on Yahoo and RB on the same day. A little searching should find it.
IQ. Joran Hoff's Smoking Gun memo made more than one reference to licensing with the Big Boys, rather than acquiring the best technology.
Specifically, "Make general cross license agreements with MAJOR PLAYERS (MY CAPS)in the telecom area at most favourable conditions.."
And "We seem to have short term technical activities and patent ideas well in parity with the LEADERS in the patent area."
The memo emphasized that they were far behind in their portfolio, and anxious to catch up to Motorola through, among other things, ""build(ing) an adequate patent portfolio, mainly through own R&D, but also through acquiring patents and licences."
If Mr. Hoff gets on the witness stand, maybe the first question should be, "In your rush to acquire patents and licenses and catch up to Motorola, Mr. Hoff, why did it take you 8 years to decide you didn't want IDCC's patents?" And, "Did your engineers share this opinion?"
Red. I believe the new date for responses is Jan 21.
JK.
I'm answering your request for the Hoff memo by email.
Can't fax for the reasons stated therein. But my email includes the name of the sender at Judge Lynn's court.
JK. "Thanks" is simply not enough.
I don't want to embarrass you. But if you hadn't taken the time to review the exhibits, we'd be chewing our fingernails again tomorrow, with a bag full of opinions, rumors, and second thoughts.
Granted, someone would give us snippits of the trial. But if it doesn't go that far, the world still needs to know the full truth about the Ericy's of the world. That truth has been circling the world's airwaves for the past two days for all to see, without even opening one exhibit.
Whether we go to trial or not, and whether we win or not, your unselfishness has not simply shown we bet on the right technology. We bet on "Right" itself. And for many on this board and Yahoo, I know that means just as much as winning.
A little mushy? Hell no!!! Your duties are clear. You only have about 2,000 exhibits to go, amigo. So get back on it Monday. And if you run out of cutters and pasters, just drop an email to Milford. It's just a little north of Dallas.
Other exhibits which could be important:
There are references to 5 patents: 705, 863 (four times), 868, 420 and 900. (Various exhibits).
The earliest Ericy memo mentioning IDCC is dated September 29, 1985, making this an 18 year fiasco. (#237). (And we thought 9 years was bad!!!!!).
Ericy met with IDCC in Philly as early as October 1986. (#242).
(I would have thought IDCC would have gone to Texas).
A Proprietary Agreement was apparently signed on October 3, 1986. (#235). (Could be in conjunction with #242).
A Confidentiality Agreement was signed between Ericy/IDCC on March 17, 1993. (#496).
The draft of a license agreement was dated July 1993. (#913).
IQ: Since I have a flair for the obvious, do you get the feeling that Ericy is now trying to cover-up by claiming that records of past agreements, drafts, meetings, etc., should not be admissible, because they involved offers of compromise, rather than legitmate negotiations for licensing?