Arm has 7 Families comprised up of 25 Processors. So, rather than seek infringement on 7 items, we now seek infringement on 25 items (that is if we are accusing every family of infringement). This doesn’t mean that a family is all or nothing, meaning that if a particular family has 4 processors, and we prove infringement for two of the processors, than we should be able to receive damages for the two processors that infringe on our IP. Based on the jockeying that we have seen take place, i.e. ARM focusing on US ’584 because maybe they feel that is their strongest case, than I would say we were jockeying for position by asking to be allowed to focus on “Families” rather than “Individual Chips” so that we could focus on the weakest link for each family and possibly get a favorable ruling against every “Family” that we accused of infringement. Now we have to prove infringement for every chip we believe is infringing, which in my mind just lengthens the process, but is fair. It would also seem to me that should we win, we might have more leverage because the process was more diligent, whereas, if we were allowed to just focus on “Families”, than ARM could appeal on the simple fact that “Families” are made up of multiple chips therefore the process was not thorough enough to come up with the correct verdict. With that said, I am sure that ARM will appeal anyways should they lose in court. All of this is my opinion, and might be completely wrong. I am not an attorney, a wannabe attorney, or even attended 1 day in Law School…..so don’t listen to a word I say. I did take the LSAT though; buy got lazy and settled for an MBA. How stupid was that? GLTAL