The following questions are rhetorical:

With the settlement, wasn't the dispute "over and done with" regardless of terms?

Why the MOU? (knowing that MOUs are typically used for contingency purposes)

Why the black out period? (Dec - Apr)

Why no reporting of Mattel and DTV in the 3Q?

I could ask 15-20 more.... But they've been asked before, and nobody offered much explanation, if any.

Another clue: Why did TPL add a bunch of claims for PTO consideration, then withdraw all those claims leaving the patent intact/unchanged? Maybe because the terms of the MOU (and any contingencies written-in to other licensing agreements) require the patents be unaltered? And if a claim change/add/delete were required, would that possible circumstance further explain Ward's continued cognizance?

I KNOW nuttin'! Back to lurk mode....

SGE