InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[ziploc_1]

The judge has taken the interesting position that the Idcc-Ericy settlement was on the basis of a joint agreement to petition for vacatur rather than the actual granting of vacatur. Therefore her reversal should not affect the settlement. I also think she was mislead by Nokia which stated that "the erroneous vacatur unjustly prevented Nok from arguing before the arbitration panel that the court's Markman and summary judgment rulings affect Nokia's obligations under the license agreement". To the contrary, Nok had already signed a license and the issues in dispute are whether the royalty rate has been triggered by Ericy and whether the rate Ericy agreed to pay should be Nok's rate as the contract seemed to state. Arbitration is about the royalty rate, not the validity of patents and claims that the court was dealing with in the Ericy case. I doubt that our lawyers made this clear to the judge.