U.S. District Judge Ware issues order finding as moot Intel’s administrative request to file certain motion materials under seal in light of Judge Ware’s earlier June 22, 2009 terminating the parties’ respective motions to compel certain discovery.

U.S. District Judge Ware issues Order arising from June 23-09 Case Management Conference setting the following schedule:

(1) On or before August 24, 2009, the parties shall jointly file a document containing (a) a list of all patents in suit; (b) a description of the claims

relevant to Intel’s purported non-infringement; and (c) a description of the features and functions of the relevant accused products

(2) On September 2, 2009 at 9 a.m., the parties in all actions shall appear for a Case Management Conference.

(3) On September 28, 2009 at 9 a.m., the Court will conduct a hearing on Wi-LAN’s Motion for Certification of Interlocutory Appeal or Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s June 4, 2009 Order

Wi-LAN delivers its Answer to the Amended Complaint for Declaratory Judgment of Intel Corporation.

Judge Ware issues Order Granting in Part Wi-LAN’s Motion to Transfer Intel DJ action to the Eastern District of Texas.

Wi-LAN’s motion to dismiss or transfer the Intel DJ proceeding was argued before U.S. District Judge Ware on Monday, May 4, 2009. Judge Ware has reserved his decision and is expected to release a written ruling at a later date.

Wi-LAN delivers Notice of Continuance rescheduling its Motion to Compel Discovery of Intel from May 26-09 until June 16-09.

Wi-LAN delivers its Notice of Motion and supporting material in support of its Motion to Compel Discovery of Intel Corporation related to Wi-LAN’s Motion to Dismiss or Transfer the Intel DJ proceeding.

The Clerk of the Court notifies the parties that Wi-LAN’s Motion to Dismiss or Transfer the Intel DJ will now be heard on Monday, May 4th instead of Friday, May 1st.

U.S. District Judge Ware issues Order permitting Intel Corporation to file under seal its amended Opposition to Wi-LAN’s Motion to Dismiss and/or Transfer Intel’s DJ proceeding to the Eastern District of Texas.

Intel Corporation files Request to File Under Seal Intel’s Opposition to Wi-LAN’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Improper Venue and Motion to Transfer to First Filed Forum.

Wi-LAN delivers Notice of Partial Withdrawal of Motion to Dismiss the Intel DJ proceeding to the extent such motion is predicated upon the lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue, but maintains that this action should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and should be transferred to the district of the first-filed litigation between the parties concerning the same subject matter.

At the Case Management Conference held on March 16, 2009, U.S. District Judge Ware set a date of April 24, 2009 for the hearing of Wi-LAN’s Motion to Dismiss or Transfer the declaratory judgment action of Intel Corporation. All other related declaratory judgment proceedings remain stayed pending the outcome of this hearing, pursuant to the Order of Judge Ware made on February 20, 2009.

U.S. District Judge Ware issues Interim Stipulated Protective Order Pending Entry of Final Protective Order.

U.S. District Judge Ware issues Order relating the Declaratory Judgment actions against Wi-LAN Inc. of Broadcom, Atheros, Acer, Apple, Dell, Sony, HP, Lenovo and Marvell – being Actions Nos. c-08-04555; c-08-05543; c-08-05544; c-08-05624 and c-08-05742 – to the Declaratory Judgment action of Intel Corporation.

Judge Ware also orders that (i) all parties in all actions shall appear for the Case Management Conference currently set for March 16, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. and shall collectively file a Joint Case Management Statement on or before March 6, 2009; (ii) all deadlines in the 5 related actions are stayed; (iii) the Wi-LAN motion to dismiss or transfer the action of Intel Corporation presently set for March 30^th is taken off calendar until such time as the Court determines the case structure following the March 16 Case Management Conference; and (iv) Wi-LAN’s motion to Extend Time in the Broadcom action is denied as moot.

Wi-LAN files Notice of Pendency of Related Ruling – being Order of US District Judge Ward in EDTX case no. 2:07-cv-473.

Management Comment
This is intended to provide a brief update on recent developments concerning Wi-LAN’s U.S. patent litigation cases.

Approximately 14 months ago on October 31, 2007 Wi-LAN commenced 2 actions in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division (the “Wi-LAN Cases”). The Wi-LAN Cases involve 19 remaining defendants including several manufacturers of Wi-Fi-enabled computer and router equipment as well as semiconductor chip vendors Intel Corporation (“Intel”), Broadcom Corporation (“Broadcom”), Atheros Communications, Inc. (“Atheros”) and Marvell Semiconductor Inc. (“Marvell”).

On September 30, 2008, without prior notice to Wi-LAN, Intel filed a declaratory judgment action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (the “Intel Case”) relating to certain Wi-LAN patents not then involved in the Wi-LAN Cases. One of the patents in the Intel Case is U.S. patent no. 6,549,759 (the “759 patent”). The Intel Case also introduced some new dual-mode Wi-Fi/WiMAX products. Wi-LAN claims that these new products are also implicated in the Wi-LAN Cases.

On October 30, 2008, in response to the new dual-mode Wi-Fi/WiMAX products introduced by Intel and other manufacturers, Wi-LAN filed a First Amended Complaint in the Wi-LAN Cases. This Complaint informed Intel and the other defendants that the Company’s patent infringement assertions in those cases now involve these new Wi-Fi and WiMAX-enabled products.

As a result of these developments, Wi-LAN decided to further amend its Complaint in the Wi-LAN Cases to add the ‘759 which applies to Wi-MAX as well as to Bluetooth technologies. Court rules required Wi-LAN to bring a motion to do this, and to discuss its intended motion with Intel and the other defendants. Wi-LAN agreed to delay its motion until December 12^th to facilitate that process.

However, Wi-LAN believes that during this period of discussion, but without warning to Wi-LAN, Broadcom jointly with Atheros and Marvell filed separate claims on December 10, 2009 against Wi-LAN in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, requesting declaratory judgments that the 759 patent is invalid and has not been infringed.

On December 12, 2008, Wi-LAN filed its motion to deliver a Supplemental First Amended Complaint, to add the 759 patent to the Wi-LAN Cases. In its proposed amendments, Wi-LAN asserts that the 759 patent is infringed by those products of the defendants which are enabled by WiMAX and certain Bluetooth technologies. By taking this step, Wi-LAN also seeks to ensure that all allegations of infringement by defendants products, whether for Wi-Fi or WiMAX capability, or both, be heard in a single suit, rather than in different jurisdictions.

After filing its December 12^th motion to add the 759 to the Wi-LAN Cases, Wi-LAN learned that on December 17th Acer, Apple, Dell and Gateway filed a declaratory judgment action in the Northern District of California on the 759 patent similar to the Broadcom/Atheros and Marvell actions. On December 23rd, Sony, Toshiba, HP and Lenovo together started yet another such action on the 759 patent in the Northern District of California. Not all of these new claims have been served on Wi-LAN. If and when service occurs, Wi-LAN will evaluate the claims and take appropriate steps to respond.

Wi-LAN has now responded to the Intel Case by bringing a motion on January 15, 2009 to dismiss that case or have it transferred from California to the Eastern District of Texas. Wi-LAN has also filed a motion on January 21^st to extend the time to respond to the Broadcom/Atheros action until 10 days after the Court rules on Wi-LAN’s motion to dismiss/transfer the Intel Case.

Wi-LAN and Intel Corporation file joint Stipulation and Proposed Order Dismissing Wi-LAN Technologies Corporation, Wi-LAN Technologies Inc. and Wi-LAN V-Chip Corp. from Intel’s action for declaratory relief.

Wi-LAN files unopposed request to extend until January 15-09 the time to answer or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint of Intel Corporation.

Wi-LAN Inc., Wi-LAN Technologies Corporation, Wi-LAN Technologies, Inc. and Wi-LAN V-Chip Corp, by and through counsel file an unopposed request to extend the time until January 5, 2009 to answer or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint filed on September 30th by Intel Corporation.