My assumption would be that since the filings involve different patents and we are waiting on USPTO reviews on each, then we would not have to wait for all the reviews to be done before money is transfered.That is, if the T3 make the same stipulations in a MOU as the J's apparently did regarding PTO approval clauses. As far as why each company was served a separate notice I believe we were buried in paper work providing documentation for all chips instead of just chip families in the J's case and apparently we have learned our lesson.IMO

"I have viewed the Pacer documents and I believe Patriot should make a public comment on the 6 recent cases filed in Texas, the relevancy as to why Acer, Asustek, HTC and Gateway have been severed as to certain patent claims infringment, compared to the Matsushita case where all four Japanese defendants were pursued in one civil case (05cv494). "