InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

lotoworld

11/15/06 1:10 PM

#171400 RE: sjratty #171397

sratty: Thanks for the great info! eom
icon url

spencer

11/15/06 1:11 PM

#171402 RE: sjratty #171397

IDCC also defeated Nokias attempts to get other discovery, such as settlement negotiation docs.

Settlement negotiations with whom?
icon url

The Count

11/15/06 1:12 PM

#171403 RE: sjratty #171397

Good news, thanks for posting. eom
icon url

mschere

11/15/06 1:16 PM

#171404 RE: sjratty #171397

Thanks for the new input..It appears that my prior post was wrong..The U.S. has adopted the Continental procedure!!!!

Posted by: mschere
In reply to: olddog967 who wrote msg# 171279 Date:11/13/2006 2:33:57 PM
Post #of 171403

Thanks for the input..I believe the U.S. Court system shares the same Court procedures as the British..

Kevin Mooney, a partner of Simmons & Simmons and president of EPLAW, said the proposed procedures are "much more continental than British" with oral hearings designed to be concluded in just one day. "It is a very front-loaded procedure, with the arguments and evidence up front, not at the last stage."

PACER: Delaware

There was an interesting special order entered yesterday. Apparently, the parties were fighting over whether Nokia had to first identify which patents are not essential and state why IDCC acted in bad faith in saying that it is, or whether IDCC has to first identify which patents are essential and provide prove of that. IDCC won this issue, and Nokia must, within 30 days, identify all patents that it contends are not essential and state why IDCC acted in bad faith that it is. IDCC also defeated Nokias attempts to get other discovery, such as settlement negotiation docs.


icon url

revlis

11/15/06 1:21 PM

#171405 RE: sjratty #171397

Can NOK appeal the decision?
icon url

sailfreeee

11/15/06 1:24 PM

#171406 RE: sjratty #171397

Thank-you
icon url

my3sons87

11/15/06 1:43 PM

#171407 RE: sjratty #171397

Sjratty, it sounds like the Judge is competent in his/her jurisprudence. The decision to make Nokia put their cards on the table is also great common sense on the part of the judge. After all Nokia brought this action and therefore should be rquired to outline the facts of their case.

I say excellent ruling, and that is further supported by the denial of entry of extraneous discovery and items. ( settlement agreements).
icon url

sinnet14

11/15/06 2:26 PM

#171412 RE: sjratty #171397

IMO it's an important win by IDCC. Thank you SJ
icon url

laranger

11/15/06 2:28 PM

#171414 RE: sjratty #171397

I suppose Nokia's answer will only apply to the patents it originally identified in the lawsuit.

But what happens to all the others that it didn't?