InterDigital Inc (IDCC): GBR & olddog967, I have a followup based...

Reply Private New

Replies (3) Next 10 Prev Next

Send PM Follow Ignore

Followers	14
Posts	2307
Boards Moderated	0
Alias Born	01/02/2003

vg_future

Re: olddog967 post# 380779

Friday, 01/17/2014 9:38:42 AM

Friday, January 17, 2014 9:38:42 AM

GBR & olddog967, I have a followup based on the logic that you have presented. Thanks in advance for all your time and expert comments.

Based on this logic, shouldn't they issue the ruling quicker to clean up the ITC case 868 and leave it with less number of issues...i.e., if they issue a determination related to '966 and '847 patents, they can simply issue a partial summary determination on 868 case and handle any remaining issues at hand. In fact didn't they just do that in the partial determination that went in favor of Samsung based on the '970 patent ruling from the ITC 800 case. If they were worried about the effect of '970 ruling from ITC 800 case, then they should have put it on hold like they are doing in this case (I am assuming that they have put this on hold considering the time that has passed after the Supreme court ruling).

Sorry! and please ignore if this question or theory doesn't make sense. It is coming from non-technical and non-legal perspective.

TIA,
vg_future