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 : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (54010)	7/29/2006 11:33:01 PM
From: rkral	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197253

*re: "ITC BRCM vs. QCOM spat docket [no. 337-543]"* Even though a Qualcomm PR dated May 17, 2006 states ... "two of the five patents originally asserted by Broadcom were dismissed" qualcomm.com ... an ITC notice issued May 24, 2006 (the last issued AFAIK) still lists all five patents. "SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 21, 2005, the Commission instituted an investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 1337, based on a complaint filed by Broadcom Corporation of Irvine, California (“Broadcom”), alleging a violation of section 337 in the importation, sale for importation, and sale within the United States after importation of certain baseband processor chips and chipsets, transmitter and receiver (radio) chips, power control chips, and products containing same, including cellular telephone handsets by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,374,311, 6,714,983, 5,682,379, 6,359,872, and 6,583,675. 70 Fed. Reg. 35707 (June 21, 2005). The complainant named Qualcomm Incorporated (“Qualcomm”) of San Diego, California as the only respondent." usitc.gov Any idea why? TIA, Ron