I believe that the fact that the Js did choose to settle, and forgo the possible invalidation defense does in fact speak volumes for the strength of those two patents, and their future outcome w/ USPTO reexams... I do not think it  makes it a "sure thing", IMO (as you know :) but I do believe the Js took that into consideration and made the decision they did.  

Much depends on the amount the Js were 'forced' to pay, which at this point we don't know.. It is still possible TPL alowed them to get off with smaller settlement amounts, in order to avoid this invalidation confrontation... but I do not believe that is the case, TPL may have given a little, but not a whole lot... 

Yes, I think it certainly further validates the patents

jmo... regards