As previously reported, ARM was in dispute with Herodion Corporation
(formerly PicoTurbo, Inc.) over the parties' respective rights and obligations
in connection with an out of court settlement between ARM and PicoTurbo, Inc.
arising from patent litigation between the two companies. ARM and Herodion
Corporation agreed to submit the dispute to Arbitration before the American
Arbitration Association.

Phase 1 of the arbitration relating to Herodion Corporation's claims for
breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing,
defamation, fraud in the inducement and breach of fiduciary duty took place
between January 5, and January 16, 2004. The Panel issued an interim award for
Phase 1 of the arbitration awarding Herodion Corporation amongst other things,
certain amounts as damages.

Following the interim award, ARM and Herodion Corporation agreed to
enter into a settlement agreement relating to all outstanding issues between ARM
and Herodion Corporation. ARM agreed to pay to Herodion Corporation, $11,000,000
in full and final settlement of all outstanding legal issues. This amount
included the original cash investment that ARM committed to make and settlement
of Herodion Corporation's claims for damages in compensation for loss of license
revenue and royalty payments.

ARM's license agreements with its licensees often include provisions
which, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions, require ARM to
indemnify its licensees if the licensed technology infringes the intellectual
property rights of a third party. The following proceedings, in which products
incorporating ARM's processor designs have been accused of patent infringement,
are subject to such indemnification provisions.

STMicroelectronics Inc. accused Motorola, Inc. (STMicroelectronics, Inc
v Motorola, Inc. United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas,
Sherman Division, Civil Action No. 4:03CV276) of infringing several of its
patents. Motorola counterclaimed with allegations that STMicroelectronics, Inc.
and STMicroelectronics N.V. infringe several Motorola patents, including
Motorola's U.S. Patent No. 5,084,814 (the "814 Patent"). Motorola alleges that
products based on ARM's processor designs infringe the 814 Patent. The Markman
hearing has taken

59

place and the ruling of the District Court is awaited. ARM has been closely
involved in the defense of this litigation to the extent that it concerns the
814 Patent and is confident that the subject technology does not infringe the
814 patent. There is a limitation on ARM's liability under the indemnity
provision relating to this litigation of US$3,000,000, which has been provided
for in full.

Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., accused Samsung Semiconductor,
Inc. (Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd v Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd et
al (Civil Action No. 02-CV-336) of infringing several of its patents. Samsung
counterclaimed with allegations that Matsushita infringes several Samsung
patents, including Samsung's U.S. Patent No. 5,781,750 (the "750 Patent") and
U.S. Patent No. 6,076,155 (the "155 Patent"). Samsung alleges that products
based on ARM's processor designs infringe the 750 Patent and the 155 Patent. The
litigation is currently in discovery. ARM is confident that the subject
technology does not infringe the 750 Patent or the 155 Patent. There is a
limitation on ARM's liability under the indemnity provision relating to this
litigation of US$1,500,000.

Motorola, Inc. has accused Analog Devices, Inc. (Motorola Inc. v. Analog
Devices, Inc., United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont
Division, Civil Action No. 1:03-CV-0131) of infringing several of its patents
including Motorola's U.S. Patent No. 5,084,814 (the "814 Patent"). Motorola
alleges that products based on ARM's processor designs infringe the 814 Patent.
The Markman hearing has taken place and the District Court has divided the
proceedings so that claims relating to process patents will be tried before
claims relating to circuit patents. The District Court has provided the results
of the Markman with respect to process patents but has not yet ruled with
respect to circuit patents. There is a limitation on ARM's liability under the
indemnity provision relating to this litigation of US$1,000,000.

On May 23, 2002, Nazomi Communications, Inc. filed suit against ARM
alleging willful infringement of Nazomi's U.S. Patent No. 6,332,215. ARM
answered Nazomi's complaint on July 22, 2002 denying infringement. ARM moved for
summary judgment and a ruling that the accused technology does not infringe. The
United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted
ARM's motion, holding that the accused technology does not infringe. Nazomi has
appealed the District Court's ruling. The Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit has not set a date to hear the appeal. ARM is confident that the effect
of the original ruling by the District Court will be maintained by the ruling of
the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

SIGNIFICANT CHANGES