"...why would Leckerone tie ACER's NDoC litigation to an ITC ruling that from all intents and purposes felt like a loss to many for some time prior to the ID??"
I may well just be oversimplifying this, but if I understand the question, the most direct reason is likely that you can't get an opponent to settle in just one venue. From the opponent's perspective, it would be stupid to settle in a venue that doesn't even have the ability to award damages (the ITC), yet leave itself open to liability and damages in the NDCA.
Of course, as to the underlying reason why Leckrone himself would want to settle in the first place, there could be multiple answers. Perhaps the case in the ITC was indeed deemed weak due to the difference in the Markman rulings, but the bottom line is likely to be that Leckrone simply needed the money. This is why I honestly and truly hope that HTC has the bal.....uh, pardon my French, the guts......, if they're not going to offer $50 million in settlement, to not offer even one thin dime and to thus remove any incentive for our fearful leaders to again settle cheap.
I'm sick to near death of hearing from the Leckrones that we have "patents on water", about "first mover discounts" that somehow got extended to some 95 "movers", that the licensing fees would be progressively increasing, and yadda-yadda-yadda. If the MMP is so pervasive and powerful, and is truly "elemental to virtually every microprocessor design" (see the banner at the top of this very page), then shut your piehole, get off your butt, and go prove it in court. After all, that's the acid test, not whatever you can bloviate about while you're cheating your business partners and lying to your most significant business partner's shareholders.
IMO, my friends, this is our last chance. Let's hope that our adversary, if it will not pay truly big bucks in settlement, has the strength of conviction to test our mettle and require us to go all the way to a jury verdict.
Best wishes to all.
