jms, as I posted in 2009 I could not believe the lengths the ALJ went to in order to find "no infringement" on the '579 patent. I think IDCC basically said "screw this", and went back to the USPTO to get the patent updated with new claims language that gave the ALJ no wiggle room. The ALJ completely fouled up his ID, IMO, and IDCC has taken the last couple of years to get everything in order so NOK cannot say they don't infringe this patent. It looks pretty solid to me, now.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
