InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[laranger]

O'Dog.

Another bone unearthed in cyberspace. LOL.

After talking to NY, I was convinced that Jorma was waiting for Memorial Day weekend to sign a letter of intent to settle, because he knew the ICC would not publish a decision before the last Friday in May. (In fact, that might still be the case).

Frankly, monthly approval made sense, because we were all surprised with the 60 day approval timeframe. But with monthly meetings, the ICC could easily slide past the first 30 days, if they had to return the draft for correction, etc.

I must admit, however, when NY said some (small) cases are decided in one day, it made no sense to wait for the next plenary session to confirm the award. Ergo, the changes in 1997, which NY was unfamiliar with.

But, I will still retain this not-so-little tidbit of hope:

1. We haven't seen the the new Appendix II, which lays out the details for Committee approval. Surely, they contain more than what was revealed by the Court.

2. The court said, in condensed form:

"the Court issued GUIDELINES whereby Committee sessions MAY decide on approval of awards, in MOST CASES,

EXCEPT FOR (those) involving matters of PARTICULAR legal complexity or INTEREST."

The ICC was evidently hidebound, and clearly needed to speed up the process. But, kindly give the following your close attention:

a. A sizeable award may be in the works. (Maybe as much as $400 million, versus an average of maybe less than $25-$50 million).

b. The Court forbid Committee approval in "matters of particular interest". Amen! And not surprising.

First, the entire wireless world is awaiting this decision.

Second, the ICC is handling the Samsung arbitration, upping the total ante considerably.

Third, hundreds of millions more could be at stake by other wireless manufacturers.

c. There may be dollar limitations in Appendix II. We all know that bureaucracies hate to give up authority, and the higher the amount, the higher the level of approval required.

Therefore, would you concede that IDCC/NOK might not be lumped in the "Most cases" category, and the decision might have to go to plenary session?