News Focus
News Focus
icon url

whizzeresq

08/06/05 12:54 PM

#122354 RE: Ghors #122349

Folks are confused about the impact of the Federal Circuit reversal on the sealed documents. Ghors, you posted:

"As Wiz said, at this point, the fruit of the poison tree evidence will no longer be available to NOK"

I don't believe that I posted that, plus, its not accurate. In footnote 3 of the opinion, the Federal Circuit states that on appeal, IDCC did not challene the allowance of Nokia's motion to intervene for purposes of acess to the sealed records and that therefore, the court did not rule on that part of Nokia's intervenetion. The Court stated, "Thus our analysis is confined to the court's June 2004 order allowing Nokia to intervene for purposes of seeking reinstatement of the vacated orders."

As a result, it seems that whatever rights were granted to Nokia with regard to the sealed documents by virtue of Judge Lynn's order, which as best I can see were limited to use in the arbitration, were not impacted by the Federal Circuit's decision. I believe that those documents may also have been produced to Nokia for use in the English 2G patent challenge based on a stipulation of the parties that resulted from Nokia's filing the federal actions for discovery in Texas and in North Carolina.

icon url

Hardball

08/07/05 11:30 AM

#122413 RE: Ghors #122349

Ghors:Fruit of the Poison Tree and NOK's Evidence

Ghors, I follow this analysis. And I HOPE it is correct.

But the fruit of the poison tree doctrine applies to CRIMINAL cases NOT civil ones.

Do you know of any authority for an application to civil cases?

If so, what process would be used for NOK to show "independent sources" or "inevitable discovery." A Kastigar type hearing? If so, what standard of proof would be utilized to evaluate the independence of the sources or inevitability of discovery of this evidence?

Thanks! I am actually dealing with a situation like this that has nothing to do with IDCC so I find this very interesting!