We can only hope it is similar to when Q delayed its earnings release the day they settled with Nokia. They were scheduled to release earnings then delayed them till the next morning then speculation swirled that they settled with Nokia. Maybe we are sitting on the verge of this also. We can only hope. The more likely answer is that they are just slow and have nothing concrete to say.

Message In Reply To:
Got to be really bad or really god, how anti-climactic would it be to go through all this suspense and get "Ok folks we met expectations and still dont have a deal in the bag yet"...you can all go back to watching the paint dry now...

Message deleted, meant as a private reply, oops.

Forget about pre Apple prices, we need something to get us back to pre Ericy prices. At this level I think we are lower than the day before the Ericy announcement over 5 years ago with that company of integrity.

Message In Reply To:
Hopefully we get something good Friday, we closed in the 16's and will need a settlement from somebody just to get back to pre=APPL prices..!!

I'm sick

11/25/08 couldn't come fast enough for me. It is make or break time and with the market being in such turmoil, I just hope we don't lose too many more shareholders before the day of reckoning happens due to other forces outside of IDCC's control.

Who knows, maybe they will release other important news before then, we can only hope. Weren't they expecting some type of agreement to be signed before the end of the 3rd quarter? They may shock us and throw us a bone. Good luck all, hopefully we can stick it out till 11/25 and we get the decision we have been patiently waiting for.

Message In Reply To:
sjaym,

I sure hope we hear of a settlement. The only other time I have felt like this was before the ERICY trial as I knew that trial would make or break IDCC. IDCC settled in mid March about a month before the trial started I believe. This ALJ decisionn is another one of those types of outcomes for me and im very glad its only a 28 days away. I have been in this stock for 10 years now, and many other posters here have been in way longer. This is IDCC's time to either show us they have the goods or it will confirm all the naysayers that IDCC is just another company fighting endless legal battles. November 25th all the questions come to a head. I for one won't stick around if the ALJ rules against us b/c I feel that the DE lawsuit will really be a waste of shareholders money and it will be a 4-5 year battle to resolve if it does get resolved. Im not being negative I'm actually relieved that we will finally see what IDCC has and only have to 2 wait 3 more weeks to hear of the decision if no settlement occurs.

Still no word on when the conference call is going to be? They have to release them soon, I would think within the next 2 weeks. The new guy isn't any quicker than Fagan.

He said he got back in on Friday with IDCC only.

Message In Reply To:
Jim...did you buy the stock back? I thought you had mentioned that you sold and went to all cash?

I resemble that remark LOL for a few shares anyway. I haven't traded this for a long time and last week got spooked a little and traded a few more shares than I would have liked but good luck to all and hopefully the fun continues. We need more days like today. That's what happens when the market stinks and you are about to leave on vacation without being able to watch like I was. This vacation could be very costly, at least I hope so. If things continue getting better I won't mind the least, maybe a little LOL. Have fun all.

Message In Reply To:
My condolences to those that got "spooked" and sold last week. (eom)

WayHaw

How long does it take to settle when you have resolved substantially all issues back in March?

Message In Reply To:
Crap...how long is this going to drag on? It's ridiculous already.

Nokia successful again. They were able to delay this for over a year due to their BS. What a joke.

Form 8-K for INTERDIGITAL, INC.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8-Oct-2008

Other Events



Item 8.01 Other Events.
Nokia Litigation Update.

On October 7, 2008, the Administrative Law Judge (the "ALJ") overseeing the U.S. International Trade Commission proceeding between InterDigital, Inc.'s wholly-owned subsidiaries InterDigital Technology Corporation and InterDigital Communications, LLC (collectively, "InterDigital") and Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc. (collectively, "Nokia"), in which InterDigital alleges that Nokia engaged in an unfair trade practice by making for importation into the United States, importing, and selling after importation into the United States certain 3G mobile handsets and components that infringe four of InterDigital's patents, scheduled the investigation's evidentiary hearing for May 26-29, 2009. The ALJ also ordered InterDigital and Nokia to submit, no later than October 17, 2008, proposed procedural schedule(s) consistent with the hearing dates.

Set for May 2009 according to Schwab

revlis sounds like a good assumption based on the order. With Nokia on the other hand, I would be surprised they would be able to work out a schedule without Nokia fighting tooth and nail for as long a delay as possible. Hopefully you are correct and the schedule is set.

Message In Reply To:
gatticaa,

I assume what IDCC proposed will be the schedule pending approval from Judge Luckern.

From the order:

Based on the foregoing, Motion No. 613-66 is granted and said stay imposed in Order No.
33 is lifted. Complainants, after consultation with each of Nokia and the staff, should submit a
proposed procedural schedule, including proposed new target date,’ no later than October 3.
Such submission, which need not be filed with the Secretary, should take into consideration the
administrative law judge’s current docket and the Commission rules which became effective in
August, 2008.

http://edisweb.usitc.gov/edismirror/337-613/Violation/310697/389862/1384/a0faec.pdf

Wasn't all that was required was for both parties to submit a possible schedule for the trial last Friday? My guess is IDCC submitted a schedule that assumes it will start pretty quickly and Nokia submitted a schedule saying they needed 5 years to prepare. Now it is up to the judge to actually rule and say you will be in my court on this date which will be much closer to IDCC's schedule than to Nokia's schedule. That coupled with the fact that IDCC usually doesn't mention anything about the court system until AFTER this board has uncovered it first lol.

Message In Reply To:
I am surprised we have not heard from IDCC concerning the new schedule for the Nokia ITC investigation.

mo

Apple iPhone 3Gs: 9,190,680 and counting

Here’s bit of upbeat economic news to brighten a gloomy Monday.

On Aug. 1, a London-based investor who calls himself “Tommo_UK” posted a message on The Mac Observer’s Apple Finance Board asking anyone who had bought an iPhone 3G to provide three pieces of data: the serial number (with a few digits X’d out), the date of purchase, and the first 13 digits of the so-called IMEI number.

The International Mobile Equipment Identity is a unique 15 digit number assigned to every cell phone when it is manufactured and can be found on the back of the box in which the iPhone is packaged. Tommo_UK’s plan was to gather enough IMEIs to decipher the meaning of those digits and determine Apple’s production rate. To get things rolling he offered his own: 01 161200 06652xx, purchased on July 11, the day the iPhone 3G was launched. (link)

Two months later, the TMO’s Apple Finance Board, with help from some folks at Investor Village’s AAPL Sanity board, has gathered IMEIs on nearly 150 iPhone 3Gs, and published them in a big Google docs spreadsheet here. The most recent entry: a 8 GB black iPhone manufactured on Sept. 29 and purchased on Oct. 4 that was, according to its IMEI, the 9,190,680th iPhone 3G built this year.

Writing in Bullish Cross on Monday, Andy Zaky and Turley Muller have used this data to make some bold predictions about what Apple is going to say when it releases its quarterly earnings report later this month.

They acknowledge that even if Apple has built more than 9 million iPhones, that doesn’t mean they have all been sold. Some of those devices may have been defective. Some may be sitting in inventory on store shelves or loading docks.

But taking all that into account, Zaky and Muller conclude that Apple has probably sold considerably more iPhones last quarter than even the Street’s most bullish analysts anticipate. Piper Jaffray’s Gene Munster, for example, predicted on Sept. 22 that Apple would sell 5 million iPhones in its fourth quarter, which ended five days later. (link)

Zaky and Muller’s bottom line:

“even if a whopping 1.5 million iPhones of the total IMEI registered devices are unsold as of today, an unlikely assumption, it would still put 3G iPhone sales at 7.6 million units.” (link)


Why is 7.6 million significant? Because coming into its fourth quarter, Apple had already sold 2.42 million first-generation iPhones. So if Tommo_UK’s IMEI data can be trusted and if Zaky and Muller’s analysis is correct, Apple (AAPL) has reached its oft-stated goal of selling at least 10 million iPhones in 2008 with three months to spare.

http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/10/06/apple-iphone-3gs-9190680-and-counting/

DR, any idea what the expected time frame should be to see that design win on the market? In the press release they stated: "In only a few weeks time, our customer was able to turn our baseband chip, supporting software, and reference designs into a leading-edge USB stick form factor prototype capable of reaching industry leading performance on a live network."

Does it take 3 months, 6 months or more to get a product out to market from the above win? I believe Merritt was quoted as saying we could expect product sales late this year or early next but I could be wrong about the time frame and it could be for some other products.


Message In Reply To:
InterDigital(R) SlimChip(TM) Modem Platform Selected by Mobile Broadband Module Company
---
LC - have we found out what company this is yet?

---
HSPA Baseband IC with Reference Platform Integrated into Leading USB Modems

KING OF PRUSSIA, Pa., Jun 16, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- InterDigital, Inc. (NASDAQ:IDCC) announced its 6071 SlimChip Broadband Modem solution has been selected by a mobile broadband module company. InterDigital's SlimChip baseband IC and reference platform, featuring 2G/3G modes with high performance HSDPA and HSUPA, will be integrated in the customer's leading USB modems and advanced wireless modules that enable high-speed mobile broadband connectivity in laptops and innovative portable devices.

"This design win with a fast-growing customer validates the performance of the SlimChip baseband IC and the flexibility of our pre-certified reference platform," commented Mark Lemmo, Executive Vice President, Business Development for InterDigital. "In only a few weeks time, our customer was able to turn our baseband chip, supporting software, and reference designs into a leading-edge USB stick form factor prototype capable of reaching industry leading performance on a live network."

InterDigital's family of SlimChip solutions include high performance baseband ICs, broadband modem IP, and complete reference platforms targeting PC cards, PCI-e Mini Cards and USB sticks. These pre-certified SlimChip reference platforms include:

-- High performance SlimChip 6071 baseband IC

-- 2G/3G protocol stack software with InterRAT

-- Reference design with proven RF, power management, connection manager software and middleware drivers

-- GCF, PTCRB and IOT testing

-- Integration support through carrier approval.

SlimChip products enable companies to accelerate time to market with a proven mobile broadband solution supporting both voice and data in a small and attractive form factor.

About InterDigital

InterDigital designs, develops and provides advanced wireless technologies and products that drive voice and data communications. InterDigital is a leading contributor to the global wireless standards and holds a strong portfolio of patented technologies which it licenses to manufacturers of 2G, 2.5G, 3G, and 802 products worldwide. Additionally, the company offers a family of SlimChip high performance mobile broadband modem solutions, consisting of Baseband ICs, Modem IP and Reference Platforms. InterDigital's differentiated technology and product solutions deliver time-to-market, performance and cost benefits.

For more information, visit: www.interdigital.com

InterDigital and SlimChip are trademarks of InterDigital, Inc.

SOURCE: InterDigital, Inc.

InterDigital, Inc.
Media Contact:
Jack Indekeu, +1 610-878-7800
jack.indekeu@interdigital.com
or
Investor Contact:
Janet Point, +1 610-878-7800
janet.point@interdigital.com

Cramer is a contrarian indicator. How long ago was it that he said to sell IDCC at $19 or so, maybe a month or two? I almost want him to say sell again on his show so we could hit $30 LOL.


Message In Reply To:
OT: Wachovia bought by Citi. Stock closed Fri at $10 and pre-mkt at .68...ouch

Cramer and WB's CEO was just pumping this about a wk ago...lol

whizzer, as usual you were correct again. Thank you and all other professionals for sharing your expertise on this board for the benefit of total strangers. Jim's board continues to be the best on the web.

Posted by: whizzeresq Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 9:13:53 AM
In reply to: Desert dweller who wrote msg# 233893 Post # of 234258

Desert Dweller--As I have posted in the past, we do not go back before Batts. The injunction is now over as Nokia did not move to stay the mandate dissolving the injunction so the Second Circuit Court of Appeals automatically issued the mandate dissolving that injunction. We are free to fully proceed and participate in the ITC investigation against Nokia. If Nokia had intended to try to obtain an appeal at the Supreme Court, it would have filed a motion to stay the mandate. The next step will probably be by the ITC setting a trial date. Whether the ALJ schedules a conference before doing that or just issues a date, I do not know.


Message In Reply To:
Form 8-K for INTERDIGITAL, INC.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

26-Sep-2008

Other Events



Item 8.01 Other Events.
Nokia Litigation Update.

On September 25, 2008, the Administrative Law Judge (the "ALJ") overseeing the U.S. International Trade Commission (the "USITC") proceeding between InterDigital, Inc.'s wholly-owned subsidiaries InterDigital Technology Corporation and InterDigital Communications, LLC (collectively, "InterDigital") and Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc. (collectively, "Nokia"), in which InterDigital alleges that Nokia engaged in an unfair trade practice by making for importation into the United States, importing, and selling after importation into the United States certain 3G mobile handsets and components that infringe four of InterDigital's patents, lifted the stay that was imposed on the proceeding on April 14, 2008. The ALJ also ordered InterDigital to consult with Nokia and the Office of Unfair Import Investigations staff and to submit, no later than October 3, 2008, a proposed procedural schedule, including a proposed new Target Date for the USITC's Final Determination.

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/080926/idcc8-k.html

I wonder if this could possibly be one of those points that Merrit talked about in the negotiating process that could put some added pressure to resolve things. I sure hope it is. The timeframe continues getting less and less. The 11/25 day of reckoning for Sammy and by extension Nokia is coming up quickly.

Message In Reply To:
Form 8-K for INTERDIGITAL, INC.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

26-Sep-2008

Other Events



Item 8.01 Other Events.
Nokia Litigation Update.

On September 25, 2008, the Administrative Law Judge (the "ALJ") overseeing the U.S. International Trade Commission (the "USITC") proceeding between InterDigital, Inc.'s wholly-owned subsidiaries InterDigital Technology Corporation and InterDigital Communications, LLC (collectively, "InterDigital") and Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc. (collectively, "Nokia"), in which InterDigital alleges that Nokia engaged in an unfair trade practice by making for importation into the United States, importing, and selling after importation into the United States certain 3G mobile handsets and components that infringe four of InterDigital's patents, lifted the stay that was imposed on the proceeding on April 14, 2008. The ALJ also ordered InterDigital to consult with Nokia and the Office of Unfair Import Investigations staff and to submit, no later than October 3, 2008, a proposed procedural schedule, including a proposed new Target Date for the USITC's Final Determination.

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/080926/idcc8-k.html

Grones, is this so we finally get paid the money from the binding arbitration for sales thru 2005? Will we still need to start a new lawsuit to get paid for 2006 sales, especially since the arbitration panel has yet to rule on how much is owed for 2006 as far as we know. Great process this binding arbitration. Maybe within 6-20 years we might finally get paid everything that is due to us.

Message In Reply To:
New Entry

Court of Appeals Docket #: 07-5669-cv
Nsuit : 3890 STATUTES-Other

InterDigital Communications v. Samsung Filed 12/19/07
Electronics Co. Ltd

Appeal SDNY (NEW YORK CITY)
from:


9/24/08 Proposed for argument the week of 12/15/08.
[Entry date Sep 24 2008 ] [DC]

It is somewhat amazing that the share buy back was not completed when we were in the teens for so long. I am sure they have their reasons but it sure seems odd that they did not buy with both hands at the time.

Message In Reply To:
Just a thought...

If the company were to release an 8k or any SEC filing are they restricted to purchasing stock in the Market for a certain number of days/hours?

In the assumption that the company has not completed the buy back, maybe they are spending it all before the S*it hits the fan for Nokia/Samsung. At this point we will have a smaller float, and hopefully many more eyes on IDCC

JMHO

Will the company bother to tell potential investors today that the Nokia ITC case should be back on track soon or are they going to keep it a secret? I guess when they changed their name from Interdigital Communications to just Interdigital it was because they realized they didn't know how to communicate and they felt the name could be misleading LOL. I can't wait till they are either willing or able to start crowing to the street about what we have and what investors here have known (or hope) that we have. It sure is frustrating that this board finds information about the company that the rest of the investment community may not know and the company for some reason doesn't share it timely. Good luck all, hopefully the Fed, Treasury and Congress are able to save the financial system from a total meltdown without screwing us and our children and grandchildren.

Based solely on the number of exhibits and having to write the opinion for IDCC and Sammy, I can't see how the case could possibly happen prior to the Sammy ruling. It sucks that it can't since Nokia may get a peak at what the judge is thinking but as long as Luckern rules in our favor, it really won't matter a bit in the long run. It might actually save a few bucks in legal expenses because it could make Nokia see the light and actually sit down and negotiate a fair settlement. I can dream can't I?

I am so happy to hear that it is not going back to dingBatts again. She f'd it up the first time it was given to her, that I have no doubt she would have hurt us again either by delaying things unecessarily by sitting on it or giving Nokia other reasons to appeal her again.

Considering IDCC's attorneys knew this was coming, the paperwork should already be prepared and on its way to Luckern IMO. If it is not, what are they waiting for? I am very surprised there wasn't an 8k filed today giving us an update which I would have thought would have included words to the effect that they have petitioned the ALJ to restart the case.

Message In Reply To:
Jimmylee: Forget those words. It's just verbage. Notice the words, "consistent with this order". The Order is that the injunction is dissolved and NOK is not entitled to arbitration. Hence, there is nothing more for Batts to do.

The only important issue is the one Whiz addressed. Nothing more happens in Batts court. It is over. Now we wait for IDCC to advise Judge Luckern of the mandate and for him to set the case for trial.

IMO g hors

Is it too much to ask for a pr from idcc congratulating our licensee for this important phone?

Thanks I get a little confused with all this legal stuff.

Attorneys, this question was probably answered already and if so, please forgive me. Now that it appears the appeal is dead and buried, are we able to go straight to the ITC to ask for a resumption of the Nokia trial or do we have to go to judge Batts, aka DingBatts, aka BattBrain, etc, for some procedural type thing first? I understand Nokia might still have the option of trying to appeal to the Supreme court but that seems unlikely to succeed based on this board. Thanks for everything.

Message In Reply To:
Nokia appeal update. Judgment MANDATE ISSUED. CLOSED. Looks over to me. Not sure what is next.


9/22/08 Judgment MANDATE ISSUED. CLOSED [Entry
date Sep 22 2008 ] [MP]

9/22/08 Notice to counsel in re: Mandate filed
9/22/08. [Entry date Sep 22 2008 ] [MP]

9/22/08 Duplicate ACCO created. [Entry
date Sep 22 2008 ] [MP]

That would be shouting and they don't know how to raise their voices or pound their chests.

Message In Reply To:
I like the ALL CAPS; Can KoP issue a Press Release in ALL CAPS, too?

Wow, does that mean those snakes from Finland didn't appeal a losing decision or is there still time for them to do that? This is great news. Their abuse of the legal system still gave them and their partners Sammy a delay of months. Sammy would have been done had Nokia not thrown their first hail mary that Luckern caught for them by combining the cases and Nokia would have been waiting on final determination had the cases not been combined with final commission decision at the end of the year. Let's get things started quickly or let them settle this f'n thing already.

Message In Reply To:
Nokia appeal update. Judgment MANDATE ISSUED. CLOSED. Looks over to me. Not sure what is next.


9/22/08 Judgment MANDATE ISSUED. CLOSED [Entry
date Sep 22 2008 ] [MP]

9/22/08 Notice to counsel in re: Mandate filed
9/22/08. [Entry date Sep 22 2008 ] [MP]

9/22/08 Duplicate ACCO created. [Entry
date Sep 22 2008 ] [MP]

m3's, I know they can't manufacture news I am just posting my wishful thinking. Hopefully they are able to finalize some deals soon, even with a tier 2 leading up to the 11/25 ALJ ruling. No matter what, in the grand scheme of things considering how long most of us have been around IDCC, 2 months is a blink of an eye.

The next 2 months will definitely get interesting. I just don't see how either Sammy or IDCC will wait until the decision. I think both parties have a lot to risk by not settling and I think there will be a settlement before judgement day.

Message In Reply To:
DD, I agree that news would be a positive. But they can't manufacture the news they have to wait for it to happen. Just as we do.

We need news. How long does it take to go from resolving substantially all disputes as stated by management way back in March to signing an agreement? Hopefully we get it soon but if not, 11/25 is not that far away to finally get one and possibly both of those resolved.

I guess management would rather have just snippets be posted all over that net that can be misinterpreted instead of showing the whole interview. It doesn't make sense to me why they wouldn't post the interview unless it is going to appear in a magazine at some point soon and they don't want to show it yet. But that really doesn't make sense either since there have been snippets quoting the interview. I wonder if we will see the whole interview?

Message In Reply To:
Dd: This is another area where IDCC's website needs improvement. I have seen sites of other companies where, if an executive or officer of the company gave an interview, a transcript of that would be posted on the company's website.

Has anyone seen the full interview? Does anyone know where the interview appeared or will appear? It seems that so far there have only been portions of the interview posted unless I missed the whole thing in a post.

Message In Reply To:
InterDigital Inc., King of Prussia, will probably weather any drop in U.S. demand for wireless-Internet software and chips because of licensing agreements with overseas companies, chief executive officer William Merritt said. InterDigital holds about 10,000 patents and patent applications, and is developing telecommunications equipment that consumers would buy even during an economic slump, Merritt said in a Sept. 16 interview. Global stock indexes plunged this week, erasing $3 trillion in value, as bank lending seized up. - Bloomberg News

http://www.philly.com/philly/business/28689779.html

So with the new rules, individual traders will need to actually borrow the shares? It won't be up to the broker to do so? How would an individual actually go about borrowing shares anyway? No need to answer that since I have not intention of shorting any stocks anyway. This seems like it will cause a huge short squeeze in many companies going forward and I guess that is why the futures are up over 300 on top of yesterday's 400 point advance. These sure are interesting times we are living through.

Message In Reply To:
alert from TradeStation to its clients (I am one) this morning:

September 19, 2008

Dear TradeStation Clients:

Yesterday, we informed you of the new short selling rule adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on September 17, 2008 (the “Rule”). In the Rule, the SEC expressed concern “about the possible unnecessary or artificial price movements based on unfounded rumors regarding the stability of financial institutions and other issuers exacerbated by “naked” short selling.” SEC Release No. 34-58572 ( http://www.sec.gov/rules/other/2008/34-58572.pdf ). In order to allay some of these concerns, the SEC imposed enhanced delivery requirements on short sales of equity securities. What this means for you is that if you sell an equity security short, and there is a failure-to-deliver the securities you shorted by the settlement date (Trade Date + 3), we are required to close out your short position no later than the beginning of the regular trading hours of the next business day (T+4).

We have received some questions as to whether TradeStation will notify you (or attempt to notify you) prior to closing out your short position in accordance with the new Rule.

THE ANSWER IS YOU WILL RECEIVE NO FURTHER NOTICE.

If required to do so by the Rule, we will take whatever action is necessary, including closing out your short position at or before the market opens on T+4. As a reminder, when you opened your equities account, you agreed that “all of your transactions shall be subject to all applicable laws, rules and regulations.” (Section 2 of the TradeStation Securities Account Agreement.)

Please consider this message as your ONLY NOTICE that we intend, from time to time as the Rule requires, to “buy-in” and close out your short sale position(s), without further notifying you, no later than market open on the fourth day after your trade date (T+4). As a reminder, any losses suffered or lost opportunities realized as a result of any such buy-ins to close out your position to satisfy the Rule will be solely your financial responsibility. We strongly recommend that you read the SEC Release and Rule and incorporate the limitations associated with this new rule into your trading strategies and decisions.

As always, we remain committed to being your direct trading firm of choice and encourage you to contact the Trade Desk at (800) 871-3563 should you have any questions or comments.

Very truly yours,

Joe Nikolson

President

TradeStation Securities, Inc.

The market is going to fly today again. It would be nice to get some news out of KoP that helps us ride that wave to new heights. We can only hope. Good luck all, hopefully things begin to settle down and get back to normal soon.

Is anyone else having difficulty reading portions of some posts? What I mean is that sometimes portions of the post doesn't appear and if you refresh, then the full post appears. Is this a ihub issue or is there a problem with my computer?

I have been experiencing this problem for about a week and it just happened again reading Jim's post where the post ended in the middle of a sentence then when I clicked back then forward, it appeared. Very strange.

I sure hope so. If management of the company risked it all on bad management and the government needs to bail them out, then the company should be wiped out. All these financial companies have been screaming for less and less regulation and interference from the government and when their risky bets go sour, they then go begging for taxpayer money. If you want taxpayer money, you have to put up with oversight and regulation.

If the past year or so showed the brain dead in Washington anything, it should be that many of the regulations that have been set aside were there for a reason and they need to be re-implemented. The other thing it should show them is that there needs to be major regulation on how big a financial institution can get. If a company is so big that failure of that company could cause widespread panic spilling over around the world, that company has gotten way too big and needs to be downsized. I am a firm believer in free market capitalism but when the government is stretching itself this thin to protect several private companies at taxpayer expense because these companies are too big to fail, the government needs to get more involved to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Message In Reply To:
The AIG deal with the govt will be massively dilutive and will pretty much wipe out the common stock holder imo.

Hopefully our lawyers are reading this board to get some free tips from our esteemed lawyers on this board. Some of the things that have been posted here would be great in a closing argument to point out the ridiculousness of Sammy's arguments.

Message In Reply To:
Reading the latest transcript, there could be closing arguments for Samsung investigation in October if the ALJ thinks they are necessary.

revlis

whizzer, thanks for the info. I am glad to read that. We should be nearing the end of the long journey, let's hope we don't get any more screwy rulings going forward since we have had more than our share. Now if only Nokia and IDCC can get back to the bargaining table and make that March press release have some real meaning. Have a good day.

Message In Reply To:
No Desert Dweller--Judge Batts is a district court judge, the second circuit is the appeals court which just reversed her. My post states that Nokia would have to go before the Second Circuit to try to seek a stay pending Sup. Ct. review, which stay would not be granted under these circumstances.

whizzer, isn't the 2nd circuit where judge DingBatts is? Would that request go back to her/him/it? If so, it depends on whether this time it comes up heads or tails for us, at least that is the way she appears to have ruled the first time against us. I hope I am wrong and it wouldn't go back to her.

Message In Reply To:
Gatticaa- Why are folks posting questions about whether Nokia can further delay this? Revlis's post quoted this from an earlier post by me:
The important thing to remember is that a stay of the Appeals Court mandate is not automatic if Nokia were to seek an appeal to the US Supreme Ct. Nokia would have to file a Motion before the Second Circuit seeking a stay of the mandate by showing good cause and that it is presenting a substantial question. I think it is highly unlikely that Nokia would be able to win such a motion based on the nature of the decision of the Second Circuit.

Doesn't this answer your question?

Hasn't Sammy used press releases and conference call quotes against IDCC in the past? If so, how can they say that they didn't expect IDCC to enforce its patents? IDCC in its SEC filings, press releases, conference calls and investor presentations have stated multiple times that they will enforce their patents if they can't come to terms with potential licensees. How can they expect anyone to believe them that they didn't think they would be sued? What a joke.

Message In Reply To:
Loop--Glad to hear you are ok. Folks have to remember that Smsung's FRAND defense is an affirmative defense that they are using to show equitable estoppel. That means they have the burden of convincing the ALJ that based on all of the facts, IDCC should be prevented from asserting the patents against them. I thought the cross-examination of Ugone was well-done by IDCC. Especially important was the fact that ETSI specifically decided not to use the concept of an overall cap when it issued its policies on 3G. That, to me, shows that a patent holder such as IDCC was put on notice that in determining a FRAND rate, there was no overall cap. In addition, Ugone used a method of using a patent holder's percentage of ownership of all of the patents in the pool. In addition to the fact that the study he used had been secretly paid for by Nokia, was the fact that there was no history of that method being used in the past as an accepted method of determining the value of a patent. The easiest way for the ALJ to deal with this would be by stating that Samsung has raised the affirmative defense and has the burden of showing that IDCC should be estopped on all factors. The second factor to the test is whether based on all of the circumstances, could Samsung reasonably assume that IDCC would not assert the patents against them because IDCC declared those patents as essential. Based on the testimony of the witnesses, it does not appear that Samsung has met its burden. In that way, the ALJ would not have to try to calculate what a FRAND rate is and whether IDCC ever offered it. IMHO