Nok's decision to risk embargo has always puzzled me. What was it that gave them the confidence to not settle before the alj decision? Several ideas have come to mind and may hold a clue as to how they will proceed with the appeal. Number one, something made them very certain that the decision was going their way, and to me it seemed very odd that an alj would make a comment that this would go to appeal. Now maybe this is an obvious observation by the alj, but with the staff already on nok's side, the comment on appeal would seem to be a signal that the alj was not comfortable issuing an embargo while an appeal was carried out. The question now becomes what do nok's attornies think of the claim construction that the alj used to justify his decision? Will they risk a certain embargo on a very narrow claim construction and give negotiating power to IDCC to push for a higher settlement? This really is a pricing dispute and nok knows that it will have to license sometime. No longer is it the mighty nok vs. a weak IDCC, so it would seem to me that the rational strategy would be for nok to strike their best deal before a decision is handed down at appeal. If they are close now in their negotiations, then maybe settling before Dec. 9th is a possibility. However, my guess is that they proceed with the oral hearings before coming to a deal. The caveat is: NOK is not your rational company and always seems to have another cat in the bag. The risk/reward pucker point is coming very soon for nok, let's see how strong a sphincter the new management team has. I will disagree that a loss at appeals is priced in to our current sp. jmo
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
