Replies to post #216928 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[revlis]

From: [e-mail]
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 4:42 PM
To: Haynes, John
Cc: Lasher, Alex; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; Nokia Interdigital ITC; smith. [e-mail];
samsung-idc-itc-service@weil .com
Subject: RE: Inv. 337-613 - coordination issues
Counsel:
To reiterate Samsung's position stated by David Hickerson at the end of this afternoon's call, Samsung
views the issue as to the scope of the preliminary injunction as a dispute between Nokia and InterDigital
and therefore takes no position. We were prepared to discuss a number of trial preparation and
coordination questions on today's call and will be prepared to take that discussion up again when the
issue is resolved. Please let us know when the parties feel that is appropriate to continue the
discussions.
Regards,
Sonal N. Mehta
Weil Gotshal & Manges

[spencer]

He really said Jokia? LOL.

[plumear]

revlis, herein you see NOK laying the groundwork to file for a stay in IDCCs action against Samsung on the basis that future action will be prejudicial against NOK. Never mind that if NOK can get to and finish the arbitration before the ITC completes Samsung, a favorable outcome for NOK could prejudice against IDCC concerning Samsung. If you were to accept NOKs contention, anything action IDCC had against anyone, as long as IDCC also had an action against NOK, it would be prejudicial against NOK. It seems this would stand the entire legal world on its head if it were to be upheld, In my nonlegal Opinion.