In federal court, under FRAP 28(j), counsel is authorized to send a letter to the clerk of the appellate court "promptly"advising the court of a "pertinent and significant" authority that came to the party's attention after the party's brief was filed or after the case was orally argued. The rule limits the body of the letter to no more than 350 words. Before FRAP 28(j) was revised to add a word limit, the rule had prohibited including any argument in the letter. Now, Rule 28(j) allows argument but requires that whatever argument is included be short, sweet and to the point.
FRAP 28(j) does not require that a copy of the new authority be attached, but the letter must contain citations to the new authority so that the appellate judges who have the case under consideration can easily find the new authority. Of course, a FRAP 28(j) letter must be served on counsel for the other parties. The rule allows the other parties to file their own FRAP 28(j) letters in response, so long as any response is made promptly and likewise limited in length to no more than 350 words.
Thank you for reminding the "lawyers" what is in store for QCOM even if they win the appeal. We both know that this case should legally, equitably, and properly be reversed. Only time will tell and I am thankful the time table will likely be late this summer. With Doug Cawley going for PRKR they do, in fact, have the very BEST. I lost my patience and haven't read this message board for weeks, but I am thankful to you for responding to the absolute #$%$" that have apparently been quite active in their quest to create fear (and probably successfully given todays pps), but we both KNOW the system works better than any other legal system and I am still confident that justice will ultimatly be done.