You say/ask: "My point is if the company that he works for is not dealing with a chip that infringes why are they getting a letter and is this company one of the 400."  

Now assuming that it is correct to say that the company in question has not and currently does not produce infringing chips, is it a company that plans to stay static and never step beyond their current technical boundries in chip manufacturing?  Will they someday step into the 21st century?  Hope you get my point.  It was rightful for this company to get a letter advising of possible past, present or future infringement (the latter, apparently, being most pertinent in this case - with the above assumption of no past/current infringement).

Further, along these lines, TPL/PTSC/Alliacense does not have visibility of this company's future plans (and wouldn't unless it's publicly disclosed).  Along similar lines, letters were probably sent to several, perhaps many companies that use chips in their products where such companies have a policy of including Patent Indemnification clauses in all their purchase orders for chips. Such companies are off the hook, but their suppliers aren't.  But TPL/PTSC/Alliacense would have virtually no way of knowing that these companies employed such a policy.  So some letters won't necessarily hit their mark. So what?

Again you post a very week conclusion, ignoring logic. Try still harder....

JMHO,

SGE