Replies to post #268699 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[Data_Rox]

thanks, yes the ban is the hammer for short term - I guess I was hoping for a legal ruling on claims that could then be used in any ongoing litigation with Nokia, or with others that practice the standard. I now understand that the ITC ruling only applies to Nokia, and only certain devices. An infringed claim/patent can't be held up as an "essential" patent for the standard.

so knowing where we are with Nokia, what would now be the best case date for an importation ban?

[olddog967]

whizzer: Just to add to your response to data's comment/question that "there is no real ongoing teeth to the ruling and Nokia can continue to appeal and litigate these infringement claims in another venue?" While the ITC decision has no res judicata effect on a distict court case, the district court apparently can take the decision into account.

Without the aid of res judicata, ITC determinations of non-infringement, invalidity, and/or unenforceability of a patent do not provide a complete barrier for a patent holder seeking to assert the same patent rights in district court. However, while the ruling of the ITC is not binding on the district court, it can be used as persuasive evidence. In Texas Instruments, the plaintiff initiated an ITC action against the defendants alleging unfair competition based on importation and sale of encapsulated circuits produced by processes covered by the plaintiffs’ patent claims. The Federal Circuit held that even in the absence of res judicata the district court has broad interpretive discretion. 90 F.3d at 1569. The Federal Circuit determined that, “[T]he district court can attribute whatever preclusive value to the prior ITC decision as it considers justified.” Id. But cf. In re Convertible Rowing Exerciser Patent Litigation, 721 F.Supp. 596, 603-604 (D. Del. 1989) (denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment of invalidity despite prior ITC determination of no violation of section 337 based on invalidity).

http://www.itcblog.com/20090319/did-you-know-determinations-of-patent-issues-at-the-itc-are-for-purposes-of-section-337-only-and-do-not-have-res-judicata-effect/