My3
Nok has a reason for wanting the psj alive. The typical language in a license requires the licensor (idcc) to report any adverse findings with regard to patent claims to their licensees. Since we are not privy to all of the licenses, we do not know how many such reports would be involved. However, it is never pleasant to have to notify any of your customers concerning any flies in the ointment no matter how large or small they may be. As of right now, the net legal effect is that the original vacating order stands until the appeal is complete. Those that are in the school that Judge Lynn did IDCC a favor are simply not considering the potential reporting requirements of adverse findings with respect to their core business. She knowingly vacated the vacating order after IDCC had passed up the chance of appealing the Sanders' rulings upon which the consensus believe caused the transfer of the case to her docket in the first place. It has been my opinion all along that she would not revisit the issues over the top of Judge Sanders, but would allow time for IDCC to appeal prior to taking the case to trial. This was her cattle prod to horse a settlement and clear her potential long trial from her docket. IDCC was out of time because a major paying licensee had opted not to renew and thus the cash flow "mandate" popped into the picture. Thus, the settlement was necessitated by her early pressure and then she gutted IDCC in the end with the vacatur of the original vacatur. If this is doing IDCC a favor, I would hate to take a cheap shot from her.
MO
loop
