(as TPL has been "foregiving" past infringement in all its licensing, and going for royalties for future infringement only - and there's probably some legal reason for them handling licensing in this way).

There is no legal reason that I am aware of, but I imagine that it is solely to simplify the license negotiations.

But here you have to think about how the Js have acted to date.  Do you think they are going to license ANYTHING before they absolutely have to?

They put up a good fight and are now capitulating, why expend more time and cost to delay the inevitable?

In any case, I don't see where the USPTO action on the '584 has ANYTHING to do with the Js inclination to SETTLE on the '148 and '336 (they are different patents/circumstances, with a different USPTO examiner).

Unfortunately, differentiating the '584 from the '148/'336 misses the point. It isn't about the individual patents, it's TPL/Moore's ability to convince the USPTO as to the veracity of the patents, and if the '584 is anything like an exemplar,  there is a very strong relationship.

Be well