Why don't you read the 2 opinions written in Micron v. Rambus and then comment re the definition of "truth".......MF and his OCOM buddies will get their just due when Cawley gets done with them
MF should have advised his buddies at QCOM to shred those damaging internal e-mails (evidence) before the trial as he did in Micron v. Rambus where both the presiding Federal Judge and the US Court of Appeals found him guilty of "spoliation" and his prediction record ( 0 for 28) since 2008 ) might have avoided a complete sweep.
A combination of the FACTS and the LAW; both subjects the shorts have overlooked to drive down the price. It"s what really occurred during the trial.
The shorts will continue to do their best to bury your post........they do not want anyone to read it for fear they might question its content.
I attempted post your brilliant analysis on Seeking Alpha and I suspect mu suggestion that they change their name to Seeking Truth was enough to keep your analysis from being printed.
On Oct 7th, the first day of triel would QCOM have settled for all 5 patents is issue to be valid, would they have settled admitting they infringed upon each of them (particularly the Magellan where the jury checked all 5 criteria, on the verdict form "yes) and 173 million dollar finding on royalties from 2006-2012)............so who won?
I challenge you to point out any testimony QCOMS arrogant, Iranian so-called expert Whose name I forgot)gave during his examination that supports your so-called reversible error. He gave none, instead he said that Sorrells, the inventor, wasn't qualified re "state of the art" but that he was extraordinarily qualified. The jury LOVED that comment. Give it up' its only just begun.
1. QCOM said the patents were invalid. The jury found otherwise (question of fact)
2. QCOM said they didn't infringe. Question of fact and the jury found otherwise.
3. The damage award was 40 % of what PRKR asked for; it was 1000% over what QCOM asked for.
4. There are 90+ additional patents of PRKR where they allege QCOM infringed that have yet to be judicially determined.
5. Where is the famous MF, your leader, who told you that the patents were invalid because of prior art and that QCOM didn't infringe?
Qcoms defense was that their famous "zif" chip was not infringing on the 5 patents in suit. . The jury found that all 5 patents in suit were infringing (including their famous zif chip) and that from 2006-2012 that was worth about $.17 per chip to PRKR. QCOM argued that thei verdict should be 17 mil.; PRKR argued for 400 mil. PRKR got 40% of what they asked for; QCOM got stuck for over 1000% of what they recommended. You are either uninformed or a liar. There will likely be no appeal because QCOM is today, having been adjudicated as infringing, willfully selling "zif" chips.lWhatever happened to all the prior art BS. The so-called appeal will likely never happen because the verdict had to be against the "manifest weight of the evidence", a question of fact for the jury to determine; and further, Judge Daulton was super cautious not to commit any judicial error.
1. PRKRs patents are valid.
3.Verdict was about 40% of what Cawley asked.
4. Verdict was 100% over the 17 mil. QCOM asked for.
5. no willfulness which PRKR asked for.
Add it up and I defy anyone, who has any reasoning ability, to demonstrate that QCOM won.
Sentiment: Strong Buy