On July 10, 2013 the confidential REPLY POST-HEARING BRIEF OF

THE COMMISSION INVESTIGATIVE STAFF was filed.On August 19, the public version of the same was filed.

VI. CONCLUSION

The Staff believes that the evidence does not establish a violation of Section 337 as to

any asserted claim of the '336 patent.

Based on the conclusion which was in the original filing dated July 10, something changed which caused Kyocera to then agree to sign an MMP license agreement this week.Could it be that they now know that the ALJ does not agree with his investigative staff’s conclusion.Let’s hope for more ITC settlements and some PRs from Patriot and Alliacense. Has anyone seen a Pacer terminating Kyocera from the NoDistrict of CA?