1. “Whether, in determining that Patent No. 6,477,151 (the ‘151’, or the ‘’151 Patent’) is unenforceable, the district court committed an error of law in failing to apply a ‘but for’ standard of causation, or indeed any lesser, known standard of causation, to the question of whether Nokia’s untimely disclosure to a standard setting committee ‘resulted in’ an unfair benefit to Nokia or its successors.”
2. “Whether the district court committed an error of law in failing to apply the clear and convincing standard of evidence, or require Apple to meet its burden under this standard, to the question of whether Nokia’s untimely disclosure ‘resulted in’ an unfair benefit to Nokia or its successors.”
3. “Whether the district court clearly erred in the finding that the ’151 Patent is ‘essential’ to the GPRS standard, where this Court’s findings in Core Wireless, ETSI’s definition of ‘essential,’ and the testimony of all experts testifying at trial was that the patented invention was optional in the standard, and companies practicing the standard were not required to practice the ‘151 Patent.”
“The parties also jointly move to voluntarily dismiss the above-captioned appeal pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 42(b), with each side bearing its own fees and costs. . . . The motions are granted. The appeal is dismissed.”
