Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Interdigital Communication(IDCC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: w molloy who wrote (3792)	2/9/2000 2:24:00 AM
From: Gus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5195

....intrigued specifically about IDC's TDMA claim Of the 4 patents (24 claims total) involved in the case, start with Patent No. 4817089 ('089 patent). Here's the link to the full text of the 1997 decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit with some excerpts I'm putting here for ease of reference: ...In an eighty-two page opinion, the district court denied both parties' post-trial motions, except that it granted ITC's motion for JMOL on the validity of three claims. See Motorola, 930 F. Supp. at 986. In particular, the judge found inadequate evidentiary support for the jury's verdict that claims 8, 9, and 11 of the '089 patent were invalid. As to the other twenty-one asserted claims, the district court set aside some of the jury's specific findings, but sustained the verdict of invalidity on at least one ground for each of those claims. The attached Appendix summarizes the district court's invalidity judgment. The district court also sustained the jury's verdict of non-infringement for all twenty-four claims... .......These jury answers create a problem. Specifically, claims 8, 9, and 11 claim various modulation techniques used to convert the digital signals into RF transmissions --claim 8 requires phase shift keying; claim 9 requires multiphase phase shift keying; claim 11 requires four level quadrature phase shift keying. However, none of the prior art references listed by the jury to support its obviousness verdict contains any teaching concerning these modulation techniques. At oral argument, Motorola conceded that, standing alone, these references are legally insufficient to render obvious the claims at issue.. foleylaw.com Bill's site has a chronicle of the subsequent validation of some of the patents in dispute in the Motorola case in Sweden and Germany, and the revalidation late last year of the remaining claims involving 2 patents by the US Patent Office. telecomtechstocks.com Heddy Lamar patented a frequency hopping system during the war. Direct sequence spread spectrum, where a carrier is modulated by a digital code, came much later, for military use. QCOM'S patents are based on this prior art. And if you drill down at least 3 levels from any of the 5 patents covered by the IDC-QCOM cross-licensing agreeement, you will find more sophisticated spread spectrum system and component patents from various companies dating back to the sixties. ....would equally apply to IDC would it not? Exactly. Nokia is also a major proponent of the 3g Patent Platform.