I didn't read the ITC briefs so I did not have an opinion on ALJ Luckern's ruling (at the time). However, had I read the Markman ruling (which sided with Nokia), I would have told you that the odds were with Nokia at the ITC.
In almost every case, you can look at both sides recommended claims construction, and then look and see who the judge sides with (on some occasions I have seen judges not side with either party but come up with their own claims construction, but this is rare). If the judge sides almost exclusively with one side for all the claims...that pretty much tells you which way he will rule. Luckern sided with Nokia. After subsequently reviewing his claims construction, there is no doubt in my mind that erred. A lot of his error was based on some loosely worded claims in IDCC patents in suit...where they used the term "continous transmissions". They clarified that term in their continuation patents to "successively sent transmissions". That may not sound like much, but it clarified that there can be codes that don't spread the bandwidth.
JMHO,
NJ
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
