Garycoal #1. IDCC is involved in five Lawsuits.
This is short and sweet and not 100% accurate as it is from memory only. But, it will refresh our memories as to the basics. I invite any of our posters to add to or subtract to this post.
1. The NOK v IDCC, Lanham Act case wherein each side now accuses the other of falsely pumping their patent portfolios for monetary gain. From the briefings, we now know that NOK is claiming that by puffing up the size of our IP essential holdings to the standards bodies and public, we are demanding and obtaining royalties in excess of what is reasonable and preventing NOK from signing licensees to the proper rates. Of course, we deny the allegation and point out that there is no cause of action or damages for making filings with standard bodies based upon belief.
IDCC now claims that NOK does the same thing. We point out that they secretly funded the Goodman/Myers report and pumped it to the public on their website. We also now know that this report found that some of NOK's IP is not essential. We allege that this falsehood as to their portfolio is costing us licenses and money.
As to delays, they are what they are. We see them as harmful because it delays the full potential of our investment. The Courts and rules upon which they operate merely consider them as the proper administration of due process and the right to be fully heard. Knowing the complexity of the issues, IMO they are not unreasonable.
2. NOK v IDCC in the UK: NOK has sued us alleging that some of our 3g patents are not essential (not for validity or non infringement) IDCC challenged the ability of the UK courts to render a verdict on the essentiality of a patent to a standard or standards. (jurisdiction and failure to state a claim) We said courts can only rule on validity and non infringement. The court disagreed and in a new and novel decision found that it could. Their appellate court agreed and affirmed.
We are now awaiting trial.
3. Federal Insurce Co. v IDCC. IDCC had insurance which would defend us in lawsuit filed by ERICY in 1994. They agreed initially to pay our defense costs with Fullbright and Jaworski. ($450 per hour if I recall) After several years they refused to pay any more legal fees at this rate and tried to get us to agree to switch defense firms at a greatly reduced hourly rate. IDCC countered with a claim of coertion.
We have heard nothing in forever on this case. I don't even know if it has a trial date as the board doesn't post on this much. Maybe olddog can raid the courts records and get us a scheduling order.
IMO G Hors
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
