Thread regarding Qualcomm Inc. layoffs

@ bkc: Companies lie all the time about this sort of sh*t. You missed the big takeaway in this case: QCOM used an outside law firm. Broadcom claimed in motion practice that QCOM did not produce all requested documents, and provided supporting evidence. QCOM claimed this was the fault of outside attorneys. The attorneys in the outside law firm were sanctioned and received heavy fines for not producing all relevant records requested by Broadcom during discovery. The outside counsel objected and requested permission to break privilege by providing the judge with copies of privileged attorney-client communications in order to show that they had complied with discovery requests, and that it was QCOM's internal counsel who decided to withhold certain documents. The big takeaway is that court refused to allow the corporation to use attorney/client privilege as a shield for failing to comply with discovery requests.

Timeline

October 2005: Qualcomm files a patent infringement lawsuit against Irvine-based rival Broadcom.

Jan. 26: A federal jury finds that Broadcom did not infringe on Qualcomm's patents and further suggests Qualcomm withheld key information that would have weakened its patent claims.

Aug. 6: San Diego federal Judge Rudi Brewster rules that Qualcomm and its lawyers hid more than 200,000 documents “in an organized program of misconduct and concealment.”

Tomorrow: Nineteen lawyers cited for their “exceptional misconduct” are set to appear at a hearing to explain why they should not be sanctioned.

"Judge Brewster found that the Qualcomm engineers had “blatantly” lied while under oath. The judge also found that Qualcomm and its attorneys knowingly failed to produce more than 200,000 pages of e-mails, memoranda and other electronic evidence that directly contradicted the legal arguments made by Qualcomm before, during and after the trial."

http://www.utsandiego.com/uniontrib/20071011/news_1b11lawyers.html

Gigi Junghans was there - she's hot