Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« IDCC Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: loop and/or attorneys

By: tfwg in IDCC | Recommend this post (0)
Wed, 01 Feb 12 2:06 AM | 350 view(s)
Boardmark this board | InterDigital Communications 		Msg. 44462 of 48237
(This msg. is a reply to 44452 by zzfan)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

I remember how excited everyone was that Lurken was the judge. So much for savvy. Hope your conclusion is correct.

But one has to wonder, with the decisions from barefoot, the ICC, and dingbatts, why we -- the good guys -- can't hit one out of the park on our first at bat. I have never been so sure of something where just about EVEYONE that counts sees it the other way. For cripes sake, investors are dying waiting for the world to get this correct.

I am either smarter than every, or one loyal dumbazz.

BB




Avatar

"The world is a dangerous place to live�not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it." �Albert Einstein

» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: loop and/or attorneys
By: zzfan in IDCC
Tue, 31 Jan 12 9:04 PM 		Msg. 44452 of 48237

If you are seeking tech talk and attempted comparisons, you should try asking your questions on the IV board. I believe NukeJohn, I_Q and several other engineers post there. Hope you get your answers.
Bear in mind that Judge Luckern did his own claims construction and did not conduct a Markman hearing prior to the evidentiary hearing. This format is very problematic on its face. Judge Luckern had a background in the chemistry field which has been a very narrow and exact science. Thus, he was far more comfortable with precise definitions and was logically less comfortable with the doctrine of equivalents and the knowledge of a person skilled in the art of air interface development. A true and thorough Markman hearing covering the claims involved could have taken the entire amount of time that the evidentiary session lasted. As I have stated in the past, if Nok had believed the issues ultimately found by Judge Luckern actually had any possibility of being determined, they would have made a motion for summary determination to avoid the cost of the evidentiary hearing and have the 337 investigation terminated early in the proceedings. Further, Judge Luckern actually asked Nok if they wanted a Markman hearing and they declined. I believe every attorney representing IDCC, Nok and the government was shocked with the determination issued by Judge Luckern. This is why I believe there is a good chance of a reversal.

MO
loop

« IDCC Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next