I hear what you're saying. And I'll say that a win in TX via settlement or trial is definitely more improtant than the dollar amount - a win is ESSENTIAL.

However, regarding the size of settlement/award, there is a "penalty" for being an uncooperative pain-in-the-ass. Other licensees didn't put us through around two years of litigation, change of venue, major legal expenses, re-exams by the USPTO, etc. There is a cost for causing all this grief. Our largest cooperative licensee paid $30M if I recall correctly, and that was Fujitsu (one of the original J5) and about a year and a half ago. Did Fujitsu manufacture its own (infringing) chips (I honestly don't KNOW, but suspect they didn't)?

That said, look at ARM. Would their chip design licensing business even exist without their technology riding on the shoulders of our patents? And how much money/profit have they made? The same could be said (to a lesser degree) about the J2.5. The profits generated by virtue of their infringement is a factor.

Now consider what was said in the shareholders meeting, about whether a PR disclosing a dollar amount being released. The $225M-250M number was thrown out. Why that particular number? I took it as a signal - that this is the dollar amount sought from (presumeably) ARM. They probably could have said $75M, as that would be significantly more than before, necessitating disclosure. Conversely, they could have said $500M to get the point across. That number sticks in my mind, though I recognize it may have been a target number, and we would accept something less, maybe a lot less just to get this behind us.

My WAG is that we settle with the J2.5/ARM for ~$450M aggregate as the high end number, and $225M as the low end. And even if we don't achieve my low end WAG, I won't be too disappointed, as long as it's over, say, $150M.

Now, having said that, there is a reason why the J2.5/ARM haven't settled yet. That reason is the dollar amount. Here's where the word "huge" really hits home. This litigation is hurting the defendants, particularly ARM. If they could put this behind them for something less than a huge amount of money, they would. They haven't.

But, this does hit on something that could be a problem/concern for our team. I've talked before about how the J2.5/ARM MUST at least give the appearance of being cooperative in mediation - negotiating in good faith. The same holds true for us. The perception of the Mediator (and Ward, for that matter) as to what dollar amount is excessive is a significant concern. If our team sat there, stubbornly, demanding a cool billion, WE would probably look like the "unreasonable bad guys". We'd have to have a darn good basis for demanding such a number (though, considering ARM, the basis would seem pretty strong, e.g., you made how many billions in profit?, and how much would you have made without piggy-backing this technology?, zero?). But it seems we can support pretty big numbers just by referring to the Fujitsu settlement.

All of that said (another novel in progress), there is a tremendous amount of importance for us in getting a "huge" amount out of this litigation. It will set the tone for all future licensees. It will be THE determinant. If we settled for say $50M aggregate from the J2.5/ARM - which would probably cover our legal expenses and little more - how much could we reasonably expect to leverage out of each of the remaining 400+? Peanuts. Less than we've been getting. And never $30M, like we got from Fujitsu.

I came up with my high end WAG based largely on the Fujitsu settlement (making it more a SWAG). It just seems to me that if we could get $30M out of them, the remaining Js (sans ARM) should be worth at least twice that amount just from the pain-in-the-ass factor, plus the probability that Fujitsu may not manufacture their own chips, and the remaining Js do. Then add legal expenses. Here I come up with $75M each, for an aggregate $225M from the Js.

For ARM, I rely on the $225M-250M number thrown out at the shareholder's meeting. Using $225M, plus the $225M from the Js, I get that $450M TARGET. Yes, huge money. Half that? Still huge money, and perhaps "adequate" to support big numbers from the remaining 400+.

Am I overly optimistic, based on the above? Probably, as I have a tendency.... Here's where the upcoming 10K will be revealing. How much did NEC pay for the parts of the company that settled? If that number is greater than $10M, then I'd say my speculation may be pretty good. Under $5M, then not so good.

Having mentioned the NEC settlement, ya gotta wonder how much that happenstance is affecting mediation.

As always, JMHOs and I KNOW nuttin'!

SGE