JK- perhaps "F&J's apparent negligence" would have been more accurate, since it may not be confirmed unless and until Nok prevails on appeal i.e. the PSJs are left standing.
However, it is my belief that F&J were greatly involved in the settlement since how could they prosecute the case up to that point and then not be involved in the settlement?
The Bancorp precedent is an old case (1994), Nok cited it, and Judge Lynn followed it, so by all appearances, F&J grossly neglected it in effecting the Ericy settlement, so it seems to me.
Also, IDCC may have new lead counsel on the Nok arbitration in Wilson Sonsini, we just don't know the respective roles of these law firms. As to why F&J is still representing IDCC in other matters, such as LU, that is a serious question IMO.
BTW, there are multiple issues that could have been handled so much better in favor of IDCC had our management and F&J acted prudently rather than foolishly e.g.:
* Instead of stating to the court that there were no 3rd parties interested in the Ericy settlement, how much better would it have been to state instead: "no litigation... however, some of IDCC's licensees may elect to apply their MFL clauses and thereby they may choose to adopt the royalty rates established by the E/SE licenses"??
* In accordance with Bancorp, how much BETTER would our position be if IDCC and F&J had made the Ericy settlement directly dependent on the Court's ruling to vacate the PSJs???
* Rather than personally enjoying a lot of insider stock sales and giving at least the APPEARANCE of a conflict of interest, how much BETTER would it have been if our management had REFRAINED from any insider stock sales while the NOK license was in final negotiation (pre-arbitration)???
* How much better would it have been if IDCC announced the Ericy/SE settlement and the Nok/Samsung impacts in SEPARATE PRs???
* How much better would it have been if IDCC had reached any reasonable compromise with Nok (assuming that was possible and IMO it was), rather than put the company through the current Nok arbitration?
These issues are not rocket science, they are all simple straight forward business and legal common sense IMO.
So, whatever the outcome of the Nok arbitration, I think shareholders should hold our top management accountable for their very poor and costly mistakes that seem so clear in retrospect. And, IDCC should hold F&J accountable for their negligence, if any.
All MO,
Corp_Buyer
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
