My Recollection of Court Events:
First of all if anyone wants a transcript in can be obtained on line at www.sdreporters.com, or call (212)805-0300, or fax 212-805-0355. Steve Griffing was the court reporter. Bear in my, however, there were many words spoken between the two lawyers and the same day delivery of a transcript is $7.20 per page, $6.00 for next day, and so on down the scale. Transcripts are available as hard copy, disk/Email.
The opinions expressed below are my own from my recollections, and notes from the hearing. For emphasis, I have added (IMO) where I thought appropriate. I am an individual investor, not affiliated with IDCC in any way. If Nokia lawyers are reading this, please do not use my words or take them out of context in any filing you may make with any Court of Law, either here or abroad.
I have used quotation marks where I am certain of the exact wording of the quoted person(s). My asides are in [brackets]
I totally agree with the substance of what M3S has posted, and what must be remembered is that both lawyers had their backs to the audience when making their statements. So, not seeing their faces, it was hard to fully evaluate their effectiveness. The President of Nokia was in attendance with three back-up lawyers from Alton-Bird and some younger staff observing the proceedings. Our guy from Wilson Sonsoni had one back-up, one in the audience, and a representative of IDCC was there.[I believe an IR person]
Our attorney, Mark Flanagan, was not as polished as their attorney, Patrick Flynn, but his substance, IMO, outweighed Flynn's style. Mark seemed nervous at first, but recovered later on, and showed passion for IDCC's cause. Both lawyers spoke very quickly, but more so Nokia's attorney, to the point that the judge asked him to slow down, and even though it was getting late in the day, he would have his chance to finish. At this point Nokia's attorney, Flynn, looked behind he shoulder at the IDCC group
(4 people) and mentioned that the investing public was here. (I don't know why this reference was made.)
Our lawyer quoted Toys R Us as precedent and a collective bargaining case, the name of which I did not hear, as another precedent. The judge questioned Mr. Flanagan on some of the wording in the PLA that related to the "purchase of all of the assets" as opposed to the wording "purchase of assets." Mr. Flynn gave a reply to the judge that seemed to satisfy him. There was also a short discussion on the meaning of purchaser vs purchasers. I believe this was relevant to the trigger issue with respect to the successors and assignee discussions (Ericy to SE). Also discussed was "sequential tender provisions", which no one in our group could follow.Mr. Flanagan closed in saying that we have come here with a needless "mountain of paper" to settle a "simple motion."
To Nokia's attorney, Flynn, the judge posed the question [somewhat sarcastic, IMO] "Why are you here." The judge went on to say that businessmen have decided that arbitration is a better means to settle business disputes and that the Federal courts were losing business [jokingly]to arbitrations because there were no reviews and no appeals. The judge added that he was well aware of ICA, and their procedures. The Nokia attorney then went on and on
about the poor work of the arbitrators in taking a "quantum leap" from point A to Point B without giving adequate justification. He cited some esoteric theories about "infidelity to contract provisions." Mr. Flynn also questioned why IDCC filed with the Court to confirm the award in the first place.[We all know the answer to that one].The judge was patient throughout and he finally stated that even if all the claimed inconsistencies about the arbitrators actions were true, it would not be enough to vacate the award.
As mentioned by M3S, IDCC said that they offered Nokia the prepayment discount if they would put the money in escrow. Nokia's attorney disputed this fact. [Seems to me like Nokia would like to get this discount now]
The hearing did not start until 3:10PM and ended approximately at 4:40PM. I think the judge (IMO) would have confirmed the award then and there except he ran out of time.
I will try to respond to any questions tomorrow (before the 1PM Giants/Dallas game.)
I am very confident of confirmation by the judge, and soon.
AI
