When DM moved form the Texas 7 into the Colorado 19 defendants...it dropped the 108 and 445...and asserted 774 , 737.

Things went fine at the beginning...settlements based on the two patents and multiple claims issues regarding the use of flash memory. Perhaps, EDIG offered the 445 and 108 for additional licensing fees, perhaps they passed.... Settlement amounts suggest.... IMO, they passed…compared to the Texas 7..

Licensing 774 then ...108 could have been considered a redundancy.... Though it has specifics to noise cancellation claims that can be asserted if they did not license 108.

In any event, 774 went through the ringer regarding the specifics flash memory.... and was ultimately limited to the use of one type flash memory..., which limited 737 to that memory type as well.

We have no idea what the phrase "patent portfolio" pertains to each defendant. There is more to the portfolio than just reading the patent front covers. If a defendant licenses a patent it needs for a specific claim, IMO, it's licensing the FlashR portfolio.

doni