Replies to post #217033 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[mschere]

Perhaps you should demand that IDCC only reinburse all outside counsel with stock in liu of money.

[frobinso]

The other thing you want to be able to maintain is anger from the ITC on the injustices going on with the verdicts coming down, but the anger and compassion will be less if it's based on our own laxity or poor representation.

Of course, I am a layman in these matters, so I defer to you and a bottle of Maalox if I was a lawyer, because I probably notice only a fraction of the things that you might feel are mistakes made along the way.

Even a good legal team is going to make them, but certainly a couple of comments like is hard to ingnore - and perhaps shouldn't be ignored by our chief legal counsel internally.

[loophole73]

Frob

In all fairness to the IDCC attorneys, I believe the written word of the 2ndCCA is nonsense. These judges have been around long enough to know that a mandatory injunction dictating that a party file certain documents in a 3rd party litigation that may result in a dismissal of their complaint in same has built in irreparable harm in case the mandatory injunction was issued in error. It is extremely obvious that if the decision qualifies for an expedited appeal process, then a certainly preliminary stay is also in order. These three judges could take judicial notice of the serious consequences that could happen if the ALJ denied the motion for stay filed by IDCC making it necessary for IDCC to file a motion to dismiss its complaint. Further, this case was heard by submission which does not allow for an oral argument to be made before the court.

MO
loop

[JD GATOR]

That is an absolute gross misrepresentation of the comments by the CCA. Nowhere can one glean that IDCC lawyers laid down on the job from that statement. We do not know what HARM IDCC lawyers espoused to the panel that would be inflicted upon IDCC in the event of the so-called "modest delay." For all we know, they laid out everything everyone's been crying about since the decision. The panel simply did not buy it, or chose to ignore it. Bottom line is: that's the nature of our judiciary. Gonna win cases you should lose, and lose some you should win. The CCA in this case, right or wrong, decided that the delay is not IRREPARABLE. Even if harm is SUBSTANTIAL, as Loop so eloquently explained, it is IRREPARABLE that is the key in this decision. The two terms are not synonomous. Come on guys! Lay off the lawyers. Look at their track record for other clients and tell me they are slouches. Read the motion to sever again and tell me they don't know their case. We are given only bits and pieces of facts and testimony. The rest is either redacted or sealed. Pretty tough (IMHO) to make a judgemnt as to the quality of our legal team based on less than the whole story. Everyone needs to lighten up and let this thing play out. What's it gonna be? IDCC lawyers suck, or there is a political conspiracy? If we were still trading at $36/share, I wonder if our lawyers would still suck.

BTW: I am an attorney and long since 1998, and not going anywhere til bankruptcy or vindication.