Replies to post #91755 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[hookrider]

laranger:"I got the impression that, if NOK goes to a NY court, they'll get what they want."

There might be a reason why NOK has not gone to the NY court. Remember the old saying "you might not want, what you wish for" IMO there is a underlining reason why NOK hasn't. The Law War Eagles may have a answer. It could be it would open up questions ERICY would like to ask NOK on some of there deals. Like why did you forget we talk about us (ERICY) taking on IDCC first, then NOK takes them on for the next 10 years. By then IDCC will be out of biz. Sorry guess that would be a question IDCC would like a answer too.

[whizzeresq]

Laranger--There really is nothing to read differently. I have summarized the status of the 4 cases, two pertain to the arbitration and two to the U.K. patent challenge. One each against Ericy and Ericy-Sony. You have to understand that there is a difference between discovery and an actual hearing. Because Nokia does not know what is in the documents that they are requesting, they filed the subpoenas for discovery. Discovery would give them an oppurtunity to review the documents before the hearing to know whether the documents would help or hurt their case. Nokia, of course, could go to a New York court to try to get a subpoena for the actual evidentiary hearing. But in that case, Nokia would not be taking discovery but would instead risk having those documents put in evidence. Because Ericy has a corporate office in Texas and Sony-Ericy has a corporate office in North Carolina and the law considers those places to be the location of corporate records, a question could arise whether a New York court would have the right to compel an arbitration document subpoeana against Ericy and Sony.