|September 20, 2013|
Previously published on September 18, 2013
On September 10, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued the public version of Order No. 64 (dated August 30, 2013) denying Complainants InterDigital Communications, Inc., InterDigital Technology Corp., IPR Licensing, Inc., and InterDigital Holdings, Inc.’s (collectively, “InterDigital”) motion to compel in Certain Wireless Devices with 3G and/or 4G Capabilities and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-868).
According to the Order, InterDigital argued that Respondents Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc.’s (“Nokia”) refusal to produce discovery regarding the sale, assignment, transfer or other divestment of Nokia’s 3G and 4G patents was unjustified and accordingly should be compelled to do so. InterDigital added that, in the alternative, if Nokia were not compelled to provide the requested discovery, it should be precluded from making arguments that could be rebutted with the requested evidence.
Both Nokia and the Commission Investigative Staff (“OUII”) opposed the motion. The remaining respondents took no position. In its opposition, OUII argued that the discovery sought by InterDigital was irrelevant to the Investigation. ALJ Bullock agreed, determining that the requested documents were not relevant to any of Nokia’s defenses, including Nokia’s defense related to InterDigital’s alleged failure to offer a license to the asserted patents on Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms. Accordingly, the ALJ denied InterDigital’s motion to compel.