put on the spot many times before....I was under the impression that Pico turbo lost against ARM a few years back.. then I came across this settlement were Pico Turbo under a different name gets 11,000,000 in damages from ARM LEGAL PROCEEDINGS As previously reported, ARM was in dispute with Herodion Corporation (formerly PicoTurbo, Inc.) over the parties' respective rights and obligations in connection with an out of court settlement between ARM and PicoTurbo, Inc. arising from patent litigation between the two companies. ARM and Herodion Corporation agreed to submit the dispute to Arbitration before the American Arbitration Association. Phase 1 of the arbitration relating to Herodion Corporation's claims for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, defamation, fraud in the inducement and breach of fiduciary duty took place between January 5, and January 16, 2004. The Panel issued an interim award for Phase 1 of the arbitration awarding Herodion Corporation amongst other things, certain amounts as damages. Following the interim award, ARM and Herodion Corporation agreed to enter into a settlement agreement relating to all outstanding issues between ARM and Herodion Corporation. ARM agreed to pay to Herodion Corporation, $11,000,000 in full and final settlement of all outstanding legal issues. This amount included the original cash investment that ARM committed to make and settlement of Herodion Corporation's claims for damages in compensation for loss of license revenue and royalty payments. ARM's license agreements with its licensees often include provisions which, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions, require ARM to indemnify its licensees if the licensed technology infringes the intellectual property rights of a third party. The following proceedings, in which products incorporating ARM's processor designs have been accused of patent infringement, are subject to such indemnification provisions. STMicroelectronics Inc. accused Motorola, Inc. (STMicroelectronics, Inc v Motorola, Inc. United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division, Civil Action No. 4:03CV276) of infringing several of its patents. Motorola counterclaimed with allegations that STMicroelectronics, Inc. and STMicroelectronics N.V. infringe several Motorola patents, including Motorola's U.S. Patent No. 5,084,814 (the "814 Patent"). Motorola alleges that products based on ARM's processor designs infringe the 814 Patent. The Markman hearing has taken 59 place and the ruling of the District Court is awaited. ARM has been closely involved in the defense of this litigation to the extent that it concerns the 814 Patent and is confident that the subject technology does not infringe the 814 patent. There is a limitation on ARM's liability under the indemnity provision relating to this litigation of US$3,000,000, which has been provided for in full. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., accused Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. (Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd v Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd et al (Civil Action No. 02-CV-336) of infringing several of its patents. Samsung counterclaimed with allegations that Matsushita infringes several Samsung patents, including Samsung's U.S. Patent No. 5,781,750 (the "750 Patent") and U.S. Patent No. 6,076,155 (the "155 Patent"). Samsung alleges that products based on ARM's processor designs infringe the 750 Patent and the 155 Patent. The litigation is currently in discovery. ARM is confident that the subject technology does not infringe the 750 Patent or the 155 Patent. There is a limitation on ARM's liability under the indemnity provision relating to this litigation of US$1,500,000. Motorola, Inc. has accused Analog Devices, Inc. (Motorola Inc. v. Analog Devices, Inc., United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division, Civil Action No. 1:03-CV-0131) of infringing several of its patents including Motorola's U.S. Patent No. 5,084,814 (the "814 Patent"). Motorola alleges that products based on ARM's processor designs infringe the 814 Patent. The Markman hearing has taken place and the District Court has divided the proceedings so that claims relating to process patents will be tried before claims relating to circuit patents. The District Court has provided the results of the Markman with respect to process patents but has not yet ruled with respect to circuit patents. There is a limitation on ARM's liability under the indemnity provision relating to this litigation of US$1,000,000.