Thank you for the insight/opinions.

As for the "cautious" approach you suggest, I see little need for it. If we license/settle, it's a done deal and the licensee has no recourse/remedy if something arises at a later date. That is unless they negotiate a contingency clause, but I would think that would only potentially influence any additional monies (though IMO infringement is infringement, whether they infringe one patent/claim or a thousand, so "additional monies", IMO, wouldn't be in play). There's also the possible exception of ongoing royalties, which if there were a hickup downstream, they'd just stop paying. Interestingly, after a '148 recert, if there's a perception by licensees that there may be the slightest possibility of a hickup like you suggest ('336 influence on '148 - though it'd have to impact all claims, which I don't think is possible), potential licensees might feel encouraged to go the ongoing royalty route, seeing it as their only possible "out".

JMHO FWIW,

SGE