News Focus
News Focus
icon url

JimLur

03/01/05 11:45 AM

#96490 RE: Corp_Buyer #96487

To all , Here's the Pacer 85 document that Corp_Buyer sent me.


http://wirelessledger.com/Pacer-IDCC-Notice-Appeal-785.pdf


xxx
icon url

Sammdogg

03/01/05 11:52 AM

#96491 RE: Corp_Buyer #96487

Corp-Buyer It was my impression that this ruling gave the arbitration panel access to parts of the PSJ that they felt were pertinent to the arbitration only. Now that the evidence phase of the arbitration is complete, why does this appeal still matter?
TIA
icon url

mschere

03/01/05 11:53 AM

#96492 RE: Corp_Buyer #96487

Thanks for the input..but as usual a follow up Question..

Who are the Parties involved in IDCC's Appeal? Are they Appealing without opposition..or is Nokia actually a concerned Party to the Appeal ? TIA

What is under appeal now is Nok's level of intervention granted by the Court (Judge Lynn) and the ability of the Court to reinstate the PSJs, given all of the circumstances and the law.


icon url

whizzeresq

03/01/05 11:54 AM

#96493 RE: Corp_Buyer #96487

Corp_Buyer--IDCC's appeal of Judge Lynn's rulings on intervention and on reinstating the partial summary judgment will be interesting in that the appeal is before the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, a special appellate court that has universal jurisdiction over patent appeals from federal district courts. Most appeals from federal district courts go to the circuit court of appeals based on the geography of where the district court is located. Patent appeals are handled differently because of Congress' view that there should be a more uniform nationwide patent law. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals will look at Judge Lynn's rulings with an eye on the impact that her rulings would have on patent cases throughout the country. In other words, would you want to allow new parties to intervene reatively freely after a case has been litigated for a long time and then basically upset settlement agreements by reinstating rulings that the parties had agreed to vacate. I have a feeling that the Federal Circuit may not agree with Judge Lynn's rulings.

There is another issue that is raised as well. Even if the Partial Summary Judgement is allowed to stand, what impact does it have? For another party to use that Ericy partial summary judgment decision in another case against IDCC, it would have to apply a doctrine that is known as collateral estoppel. Under the rulings of the Federal Circuit that I recall from years ago (I don't want to do the research to post the cases now given the fact that the appeal has not been heard) dealing with collateral estoppel, Nokia (and others) might not be able to use the Partial Summary Judgment ruling against IDCC even if it is allowed to stand.