IMO...I agree, it will be tough to win the "584 on appeal solely based on Judge Ward's statistics for Markman rullings getting overturned. And when you think about it, you appreciate his statistics because we look to be in good shape on both the "336 & "148 based on the Markman rulling. I would still like to win on the "584, and there is still a chance, but why waste the resources fighting ARM when we can focus on the two patents that appear to be in good shape, and take on the "584 when we can focus all of resources on ARM. I have followed many cases in Texas since becoming a shareholder in PTSC, and IMO, I can't name one that is even close to being as complex as ours. IMO, I am sure our legal team felt that based on all of the documents being submitted, complexity of the case, and venue, it would be best to remove ARM for now so that we can focus on our strengths and have a better chance in front of a jury should it go to trial. Yes, it would have been better if we won the Markman hands down on the "584, but we didn't, so we move on the best way we can. As far as the PR's, IMO, both sides embellished a little, us more than ARM. IMO, ARM is NOT happy with the "Without Prejudice" stipulation, as we can come back after them in the future. ARM is touting this as a win, and they should because they have a large customer base to protect, and in the short term, they did win. We are touting it as a victory because we removed them from the case, and we should, because we have a large customer base as well. Difference is, our customer base isn't paying right now, and we don't want to show weakness. We need to win in Texas and in a big way. Either a nice sized settlement, or a victory by trial. We need this!

As far as football. Yes, your Patriots look good, but so do my Steelers. I look forward to when we meet up in I think December? Should be a good one....might have to make a wager with ya! Hope things are good with you. Good luck to you, me, us, and all longs.