Loop,
At the end of the oral arguments, Judge Newman requested the parties to submit a less-redacted version of their reply briefs. A few months after the revised reply briefs were submitted by all three parties, I decided to compare the original IDCC reply brief to the revised reply brief. I expected the paging of the revised reply bried to be the same with only some of the redactions removed. I found that the revised IDCC reply brief was different in its paging and some of its content than the orignal reply brief. I have to assume the NOK and the ITC reply briefs were different as well although I did not perform a comparison.
So now we have the oral arguments that were based upon the original briefs and a new set of briefs upon which the panel of judges did not hear any oral arguement. Is this normal procedure or does it add another level of confusion to the judicial process and in reaching a decision?
| 