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.
Sorry to hear that wilco, hope you can see the fruits of your investment soon.
You know that if the ALJ severs the SAM case, then NOK will file a motion to stay the SAM proceedings because of prejudice or whatever they claimed when they asked for the cases to be consolidated.
Why is the legal system raping IDCC?
Let's hope the ALJ does not move back any of those deadlines.
The CCA granted IDCC's motion to an expedited appeal, right? Or was it just an expedited ruling on the motion to stay?
Loop, thank you for your thoughts. Here's to hoping that the 2nd Circuit just reverses Batts' decision without remanding.
Loop, do you believe the ALJ will lift the suspension after the Second Circuit stays the injunction? Or will the ALJ wait until after the Second Circuit makes a final ruling on the appeal?
I was thinking that a better outcome to the ALJ suspending the hearing would have been if the ALJ just ignored IDCC's motion to stay, and just proceeded with the hearing with both NOK and SAM on April 21. Then maybe rule on the motion to stay after the hearing. That would have been great. Oh well.
OT: Thanks, that was a damn good read. eom
Very interesting that IDCC and SAM, but not NOK, were on Monday's telephone conference. Looks like SAM doesn't want the ITC case to proceed down a path that NOK wants.
Hey, don't call Luckern a cheater!
I was hoping the ALJ might reject IDCC's motion to stay, but that will not happen. He wants to see how the Second Circuit appeal plays out.
Whoa. So NOK's actions have caused SAM to be delayed.
Loop, do you say that based on the fact that they haven't stayed the injunction? You think they'll just rule on the appeal without ruling on the motion to stay? They better hurry, because the ITC hearing starts in a few days.
Never a lousy time for the lawyers, IMO. It will only be lousy for them when IDCC and NOK finally settle. At that point their cash cow will finally end. What will they do at that point??
Does the fact that IDCC did not call out NOK and others like QCOM did mean anything? Maybe IDCC and NOK are finally getting along.
Interesting that SAM's lawyers didn't take a position. Doesn't that seem strange?
And the staff has indicated that they want to review all the filings before issuing their recommendation. Sounds like they might vote against staying the NOK proceeding?
What are the chances that the ALJ could actually deny the motion to stay the NOK proceeding?
It would be nice if on the second try, Judge Batts ordered NOK to file a request to the ICC to terminate the arbitration.
Based on how overwhelmed she was on the subject matter, I wouldn't be surprised if she ruled in favor of IDCC on the second try. She ruled in favor of NOK on the first try, and if the 2nd Circuit tells her she messed up, then she will probably say "OK, I'll just rule in favor of IDCC this time because I don't know what the hell is going on here and I don't want to deal with this case anymore."
Did I miss something, or, can someone explain how the Arbitration filing of 4/1 is not "material"?
I undestand it's two weeks old, but I've only known about it for 3 days.
I'm having a hard time imagining a scenario where no 8-k was required. I don't claim to be the sharpest knife in the block. Anyone?
Larry didn't think we needed to worry about that.
whizzer: Does that mean a ruling will be issued tomorrow?
Random spasm of short covering.
Thanks whizzer. If the Second Circuit sent it back to the SDNY, would that automatically stay or nullify the injunction?
Loop/Whizzer/Ghors:
After reading the Second Circuit filings by NOK and IDCC, what do you think is the most likely ruling by the Second Circuit?
Will they stay the injunction?
Or will they "split the baby" and stay the injunction, but also force IDCC to request the ITC to hold off on any exclusion order until after IDCC either wins the appeal or wins the arbitration?
Or will they deny the motion to stay the injunction?
Seems to me that if I am a lawyer for company "I" and charge X per hour for my services, I'll stand to be deeper in green if I deliver Y, rather than Y plus information I got for free on i-hub which puts Y to shame.
Well, they can deliver Y plus I, and no one will know that they got I off of an internet msg board.
But yeah, at the end of the day, do the lawyers really care if they miss a piece of information? They just care about being paid, and as long as they don't do a terrible job, they won't have to worry about being fired.
IDCC's attorneys are human, so they make mistakes sometimes. (Junior attorneys probably make more than the senior ones.) You would hope that the Chief Legal Counsel would help catch anything that the attorneys missed.
The lawyers handling the case can't know the history of the company as well as shareholders such as Loop, Whizzer, and Ghors. But then, that's why we had Larry Shay as our Chief Legal Officer. It was his responsibility to keep the lawyers up to speed on everything, in case they missed something. So hopefully all the bases have been covered. Or maybe we're getting the law firms' junior attorneys, instead of their senior big guns?
Thanks o'dog. Maybe they will take so much time to ponder the stay that the hearing in late April will finish before they decide on the stay. LOL.
Here is what could happen with IDCC's motion to stay the ITC case:
IDCC filed the motion late on Friday.
Because it's Friday, the ALJ got a jumpstart on the weekend by going home early. He doesn't even see the motion.
ALJ comes in on Monday and sees the motion, but he doesn't do anything with it, because he has other work to finish. (Aren't there still some motions that he hasn't ruled on?)
Maybe the ALJ will have time later in the week, or the week after, to look at the motion, but by then it could be moot, because the Second Circuit may have stayed the injunction.
olddog, or anyone else:
Correct me if I am wrong, but I do not believe the ALJ has ever ruled on a motion within a few days. Hasn't he always taken at least a week before ruling on a motion?
We need Loop to file a friend of the court brief in reply to this.
revlis: Thank you for taking the time to gather and go thru all the filings.
It says:
To date, the parties have followed the ALJ's Ground Rules and Order No. 7 by reporting the "results" of their settlement conferences.
Why in the world did they put the word results in quotes?
Could the ALJ deny both the motion for stay and motion for termination, because the ALJ believes that IDCC filed them under duress?
He might have just changed his mind, based on the new information that NOK has filed for the arbitration.
I believe she said "by April 11".
Is Alyce in bed with William T.?
LOL
Did the NAZ and DOW volume double at the same time?
Carpenter: heard it was in his last report. eom
I heard TC believes that another 3G license will be announced before the end of this month.