In addition to my post earlier, after a bit more reflection, there is another reason that the NDA could have been inserted into the 4 J3 licenses where they weren't in all the other cases.  And in thinking this through, I think this probably plays a large factor in why there was and NDA in this case, and any lawyers here can confirm/deny or expand on this thought.

Considering these companies went a long way down the road to litigation, and there was likely a large amount of discovery involved in the process from each of theses parties, some of whom are competitors, I'm sure there was a lot of sensitive and proprietary information that came into play.  It seems logical that this would be the case.  Therefore, it seems very logical and essential in fact that an NDA would be put in place that would not only preclude the disclosure of the financial details, but would muzzle any discussion that might reveal any information that was revealed during the process.

I don't think this necessarily discounts any of my previous points, but it certainly, at least to me, seems to be the likely MAIN answer to my question about what is different about these licenses versus any others, so I thought I should stated it as well (as if my other post wasn't long enough, lol!).  I'd love to hear some feedback from Ronran or any other lawyer that might have some insight and can expound on this or refute it.  Thanks in advance.