Replies to post #72392 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[imalurker_2]

If two of the three arbitors elect NOT to see the sealed docs, or if two of the three elect NOT to open the sealed docs, the arbitors could very well come to an early conclusion.
What then could NOK do to obstruct?

[BondGekko]

OT Jimlur I can't post to Raging Bull anymore, don't know why, I can log on but can't post. Can you do me a favor and post one message on the jgmha board on raging bull

It would just be to post that there is a new Jag Media message board on investorshub.com for symbol jaghv

This would bring some traffic to this website. Let me if you can do this. Thanks.

[Corp_Buyer]

Jim- all good points. An appeal would not surprise me since IDCC stated in the original joint request for vacatur that they do not want the PSJs to become a precedent.

With the latest court ruling, NOK has in effect made the PSJs a precedent contrary to IDCC's express intentions and with perhaps very damaging future effect.

While I do agree that the latest court ruling may not help Nok in the arbitration, it seems that IDCC would be much better off without this ruling, so if IDCC thinks it is worth appealing, then I expect we will appeal since there is more at stake than the Nok arbitration. Even considering just the Nok arbitration, the court ruling is not a positive IMO despite all the reasons proposed here for seeing it as a positive.

Also, the court's logic seems very flawed to me, so if IDCC believes there is reversible error, then surely they would want to correct it.

Even if there is an appeal, I do not think anybody wants any further delay (other than perhaps Nok), so the arbitration may still go ahead in Jan. '05 even if an appeal is pending.

All JMO,
Corp_Buyer