To all and Whiz and Hardball: I have gone back and reviewed some of my earlier posts and the Appellate opinion.
Whiz is right that IDCC did not appeal the first granting of the intervention of NOK. JK, Chartex and I were at the hearing and after granting intervention the judge said that ERICY and IDCC were to prepare a list of sealed documents. She was going to examine them and make the list available to NOK's lawyers for examination. After she received the list she was going to decided if she was going to let NOK's lawyers see the documents. However, any documents they looked at were not to be given to NOK. She also stated that she would make the documents available to the arbitrators if they asked for them. I am looking for the actual orders, but haven't found them yet. JK and Chartex please correct the above if you disagree, but I am pretty sure the above is accurate as to the hearing and judge Lynn's statements.
Then a month later, NOK filed to expand the intervention to reinstate the vacated documents. The court held another hearing and allowed this expanded intervention and unvacated the vacated MSJ's which threw out 7 or our 11 claims.
It was this expanded intervention which the appeals court threw out. Therefore, the original intervention stayed intact with the court allowing NOK's lawyers to see the documents from the list and the arb panel allowed to see them.
NOK was never allowed to use the documents in any other proceeding, including DE or the UK at that point in time.
I am going to spend the rest of the day, going back through the UK and Sherman, Tx. fed court filings which have been posted to this board to try and determine if IDCC agreed or any court ordered IDCC to let NOK use the unsealed documents in any other court. Maybe olddog or someone with a faster computer can review the documents quicker. Otherwise I'll be back.
Hardball, as to the poison pill post, please disregard I picked that up from one of the other members posts and incorrectly applied it to the appeal. I'm sorry but I can't help you with your question as I am not familiar with Kastigar hearings. Many times, courts and lawyers give a name to a hearing (Markman) based upon the name of an appellate decision. The hearings may be known as Kastigar from circuit to circuit or it might be an individual state matter.
IMO Ghors
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
