InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[dagrinch]

rmarchma--your juxtapositioning of those two releases is extremely intriguing. JKJ's experienced opinion notwithstanding, it would seem to me that only a few interpretations could survive scrutiny:
A) An entire patent removed was of such incidental importance that IDCC's battery of lawyers feel that there would be no significant effect upon eventual judicial finding/licensing.
B) ...I may need help with this one...The occasionally stated legal opinion on these boards that infringement in part (of a patent) is still infringement, and therefor a given part or parts of a patent found not to be infringed would not change the judicial finding of infringement of said patent.
C) The removal of certain claims signified that the court accepts that these portions of patents, or patents, have indeed been infringed, and that the court has found in favor of IDCC. Only those claims still in question remain to be litigated.

If the removed claims were deleted from the case for any other reason, such as ruling in Ericy's favor in a matter of some substance, the statements in these releases would be contradictory, with one offering a false impression.

I really don't think that in "A" above it is possible to remove an entire patent from this litigation without it being material to the result. This leaves me with "B" and "C."

Comments anyone?

peace,
dagrinch