My opinions on the apparent hold-up in mediation and on the '548.

I believe the hold-up in mediation (assuming there is one - but I think it's pretty clear there is) has solely to do with the issues for which the parties have agreed to a motion for an expedited ruling, i.e., the Shaw/Hamilton/Higgins issue. That and the dollar amount for a settlement (which will be driven by Ward's ruling).

As for the '548, isn't it already removed as a claim against any party to the instant litigation? Assuming it is, I don't see why it would be included in any settlement "package". In fact, I would think that a settlement would only involve the specific patents involved in the case (i.e., the '148 and '336). It's THIS CASE that everyone is trying to settle (hopefully trying! LOL). Not only would it not be prudent to include more than necessary (closing windows of potential future opportunities on the 5 other patents), it might "muddy the waters" since the court is not currently entertaining claims outside those of the '148 and '336 (e.g., including others would cause a "what's this?" by the court). Perhaps a separate settlement(s) (for more money) to cover possible infringement of the other 5 patents, but I'd think a settlement(s) presented to the court would be crisp and clear as closure of the patents in contention, visible to the court.

JMHOs,

SGE

PS: Look out, I'm formulating a novel in my pea brain!