Oh yes, I remember, and I also remember how scathing the CAFC decision was regarding Nokia.
Although the link no longer seems to work, below is but a segment from the July 31, 2008 ruling of the Court of Appeal
July 31, 2008 - CA2/NOK: Reversed and “remanded (back to Batts) for further proceedings consistent with this order”
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcU1VNXDA4LTE2NDJfc28ucGRm/08-1642_so.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysquery/irl582d/5/hilite
We conclude, therefore, that Nokia has waived its right to arbitrate through its repeated, intentional invocation of judicial process to resolve questions about the scope of the patents at issue and the applicability of the license established by the Agreement to these patents. Because Nokia has waived its right to arbitrate these questions, it has failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits of its underlying action to enforce the arbitration agreement. That failure is fatal to its motion for a preliminary injunction, and the district court’s grant of that motion is therefore REVERSED. The case is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this order.
IMO, Magilla
| 
