At some point in the litigation, a defendant might be forced to make the business decision to settle. While such a settlement decision might be rational when considering that defendant’s business, such settlement might be completely irrational when considering ARM’s business interests."

Sounds to me like ARM is saying "some of the defendants ARE infringing". Maybe the J3 "tweaked the tech" that they liscensed from ARM so that by the time they finished they were infringing on our patent #584--IMHO, that may be why TT&C have asked for the extention.--"We have to examine all of the products that use the "fetch instruction tech". (this was probably the latest info that we got from them). It also occured to me that ARM and TPL may haave come to an agreement about the 584. The 336 and 148 should be a very different story. I appreciate you noting the difference from ARM's original intervention statements, ads