Replies to post #242067 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[nessco]

They asked to see the negotiations not the settlement, as there is no settlement. If there was a settlement the alj would not be bringing Nok back for a trial. And your question was already answered but you refuse to listen. Sam was allowed to see one side of the offer but not the other.
It's not a matter of like or dislike, everybody loves you. Just chill. If there was a settlement with Nok they would have to disclose it just like they have disclosed everything else.
With all my love
Ness

[revlis]

mickey,

This is the judge's order:

Order No. 2 1 : Granting In Part Samsung’s Motion No. 60 1 - 15 To Compel

Based on the record in this case, including the defenses raised by Samsung, the
administrative law judge is ordering complainants to produce to Samsung, under the protective
order, all documents not already produced concerning licenses and settlement negotiations
between complainants and Nokia that contain complainant’s settlement offers to Nokia. However
any reference to Nokia’s settlement offers to complainants in said documents should be redacted
10
from said documents before production to Samsung. Said production should take place no later
than the close of business on July 3,2008.
Motion No. 601-15 is granted to the extent indicated.

http://edisweb.usitc.gov/edismirror/337-601/Violation/311127/391005/1dd/a171fd.pdf

[revlis]

mickey,

Here is an old post by Ghors reporting what squingebob and I told him from the last day of the hearing. Pay particularly attention to what I highlighted. That will give some confirmation to your version of events.

Posted by: Ghors Date: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 12:51:57 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 242093 [Send a link via email]
FLASH: Just heard from our guys at the ITC hearing. They have been trying to call Jim but say his line is busy. I have asked loop to call me to discuss my notes.

Here is a short version of what I was told and I'm not 100% certain of the exact words or implications, so please don't quiz me. I was told the hearing will continue into the late evening Eastern time, so it may be tomorrow before they can post. I am also leaving for golf in 1 1/2 hours so I won't be available to respond to questions for very long.

1. They perceive something is happening as there are many expensive suits present. One person appeared to be Korean with the name of Alfred. Not certain if this is an Americanized Alfred or a nickname. SAM's lawyer spoke to him and this was the name our guys heard.

2. Most of morning was with SAM's economic expert, Eugone. He testified re Frand rates from the Goodman, Myers report.

3. (Here's is a point they heard which was supposed to be outside their hearing and confidential. Apparently, the judge reacted to the mistake but kept on going. They don't know who made the statement.) "WCDMA component of NOK settlement".

4. The Staff attorney spoke early and said.

[revlis]

mickey,

Here is something else you may not know. This is what Mr. Shay said to teecee after the Batts decision. That was a few days before the 8-K.

he then asked me...what was that date the judge gave...i said 4/11...he said...i wouldnt worry about that date...again w/ a big smile.

I will give you my take on that whole comment. I think there was an agreement but after the Batts decision, Nokia decided to "revisit" its offer leaving everything else in place.

Payback time.

Bill Merritt in the last cc:

William Merritt

I think with the -- I might get into the specifics, but generally when you have a passage or time between a particular deal structure, you are working on and now you have to revisit things, right.

mo