I'll reiterate my opinion, but in terms to respond to your post.  I don't think anything has been "let of the hook", as I strongly suspect that the specified chips are ARM chips, and the remaing defendants (sans ARM) are indemnified from liability.  ARM is liable (and that's why they engaged in this litigation, I bet).  The defendants (sans ARM) remain liable for other chips they used that infringe, whether procured from another supplier or built in-house.

JMHO, this changes nothing, other than clearing the decks for settlements or merely clarifying the situation for the court.

Ron, if able, please through in your two cents on my speculation. AND GET WELL SOON!

SGE