I'm beginning to question your objectives, for example,

By removing the license fees paid by previous defendants, add the extra time and loss of discounted licenses, plus the potential for triple damages at trial, I would suggest a potential range between $750 M and $1,100 M. Obviously, these would be reduced because of any pre-trial settlement. On this basis, I would confirm my prior estimate of PTSC's net share being not less than $175 M(pay $350 M now, or face the potential liability of $1,100 M at trial).

http://www.agoracom.com/ir/patriot/messages/629252#message

was predicated on,

I like to keep it simple and let the lawyers work on the minutiae

First of all we know the original claim in CA was minimum $ 200 M (including Sony and Fujitsu but without JVC) and second the payment of more than $ 30 M from one of the companies, that settled during the case. Another helpfull indication of importance could be the marketcap of these companies.

I believe that the minimum was at least $300 M(several hundreds ie more than 2 or 3). Dividing the target settlement by 5 is also problematic because those that settled received the early mover discount, those remaining in the litigation would therefore be expected to pay more as the discount has gone, and they protracted the case.

http://www.agoracom.com/ir/patriot/messages/629252#message

which you conveniently omitted.

Patriot Scientific Dismisses Lawsuits Against Major Electronics Equipment Manufacturers; Strategic Move in Management of Patent Portfolio Litigation

October 25, 2005 21:36:01 (ET)

SAN DIEGO, Oct 25, 2005 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Patriot Scientific Corporation (OTCBB:PTSC.OB) a high-tech intellectual properties company that specializes in developing high-performance, ultra-low power microprocessor technology, has announced the voluntary self-dismissal of its lawsuit against Fujitsu Computer Systems, Inc.; Matsushita Electric Corporation of America; NEC Solutions (America) Inc.; Sony Electronics Inc.; and Toshiba America Inc.

Patriot Chairman, CEO and President David Pohl announced that the company has dismissed the action which had been pending in Federal District Court in Oakland, California. This case sought damages in excess of several hundred million dollars for claimed infringements involving patented microprocessor design technology held within Patriot Scientific's intellectual property portfolio."

In June, 2005, Patriot Scientific and The TPL Group, a global intellectual property management company, created a joint venture that resulted in the unified ownership of the portfolio. As a result, the TPL Group was assigned the management of the marketing, licensing and defense of these patents.

"Patriot reviews regular reports detailing the activities of The TPL Group on behalf of our unified portfolio and the series of microprocessor patents that are at the heart of a global $200 billion-plus microprocessor end-use market," Pohl pointed out, "and we are pleased with the significant effort that TPL is making. Having seen the effectiveness of The TPL Group in operation, it is Patriot Scientific's opinion that infringement lawsuits regarding the patent portfolio will be very capably managed by The TPL Group," Pohl explained. "Monday's strategic action is consistent with the cooperative spirit of the agreement we reached with TPL in June 2005."

In connection with this strategic decision, The TPL Group today announced it has filed broad-based intellectual property claim in the US District Court, Eastern District of Texas against a group of major Japanese electronics manufacturers. The broad-based claim cites Fujitsu, Matsushita, NEC Toshiba and their affiliates for direct infringement, contributory infringement, and inducing the infringement of at least three of the ten patents jointly owned with Patriot Scientific Corporation and contained in the Moore Microprocessor Patent(TM) (MMP) Portfolio, specifically

4 U.S. 5,784,584: Multiple Instruction Fetch

4 U.S. 5,809,336: Clocking CPU and I/O Separately

4 U.S. 6,598,148: Use of Multiple Cores and Embedded Memory

The cited infringements pertain to a wide variety of end-user products including personal computers, servers, workstations, home theater systems, digital TVs, video games, DVD Recorders/Players, mobile handsets and automotive electronics.

The Eastern District of Texas and the Eastern District of Virginia are noted for their Local Rules structure, which makes it more difficult for large corporate infringers to engage in the dilatory and delaying tactics often used to disadvantage individual patent holders. Thanks to the Local Rules structure, these Districts enable patent infringement cases to move to trial in nine to twelve months, thus earning both Districts the common nickname of "Rocket Docket."

About the MMP Portfolio

The MMP portfolio contains intellectual property that became jointly owned by the privately held TPL Group and publicly held Patriot Scientific in a settlement between them in June 2005. Both TPL and Patriot assert that their jointly owned patents have long been essential to the design of advanced microprocessors, digital signal processors, embedded processors and system-on-chip devices. Global sales of end products deploying chips using technologies protected by the jointly owned patents are estimated to be greater than $200 billion annually. The MMP Portfolio is exclusively managed by Alliacense, a TPL Group enterprise. While major microprocessor manufacturers such as Intel (NasdaqNM: INTC) and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD, Trade) were early MMP Portfolio licensees, Alliacense is now focusing its licensing efforts on system manufacturers such as the four defendants cited in the broad-based complaint filed yesterday.

About Patriot Scientific

Patriot Scientific (OTC Bulletin Board: PTSC.OB) has emerged as an effective and dynamic intellectual property company, developing and marketing innovative and proprietary semiconductor technologies. The company's portfolio of proprietary designs encompasses what is believed to be fundamental ultra-low-power array microprocessor technology, as well as pending patents designed to protect Patriot's proprietary technology and architecture.

Detailed information about Patriot Scientific can be found on the website www.ptsc.com. Copies of Patriot Scientific press releases, current price quotes, stock charts and other valuable information for investors may be found at www.hawkassociates.com and www.americanmicrocaps.com. An investment profile on Patriot Scientific may be found at http://www.hawkassociates.com/patriot/profile.htm

Safe Harbor statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Statements in this news release looking forward in time involve risks and uncertainties, including the risks associated with the effect of changing economic conditions, trends in the products markets, variations in the company's cash flow, market acceptance risks, technical development risks, seasonality and other risk factors detailed in the company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings.

http://www.ptsc.com/news/press_releases/20051025.asp

So, bearing in mind that the PTSC release is over 2 years old, one could have reasonably expected negotiations to start at about $250million for past infringement(this gives the base $750million, including the potential triple damages),add in another $100million for a license(based on 3 x the current known maximum)and one, in my very humble opinion, arrives at the $350million figure.

Include the facts of the positive Markman, the USPTO findings/TPL and Moore's response, and the joint motions, and I sincerely believe that my estimate is on the conservative side.

So, even tho we are in such a position of strength as you suggest, TPL plans on leaving upwards of a 1/2 Bil on the table to settle.. amicably...

TPL is in a position of strength.. but IMO, not to the degree you suggest.. not yet

The Triple Damages is but the Damoclean Sword used by TPL to encourage settlement by the Defendants. Until such time as it is unsheathed, if at all, there is no $500million left anywhere. Therefore, I humbly suggest that you review all the information available when arriving at a conclusion or constructing a criticism.

Be well