Does anyone know or have an understanding as to:

1. If Js were all licensees of ARM microprossors, why ARM was not named in the lawsuit to begin with (ARM had to file to intervene)?

2. If Js were all licensees of ARM microprossors and they were claimed to infring on 336 and 148, why was the claim against ARM only as to 584? I thought 336 and 148 had broader application then 584?

3. I read that TPL is still claiming ARM is infringing only on 749 but why was that claim not made during the lawsuit? I am unaware of any current litigation against ARM.

What I am really getting at is whether the 584 has any affect on the 336 and 148 and therefore whether the claims construction as to the 584 had a bigger impact on the case against the Js then we thought (led to believe) and therefor a bigger impact on application of 148 and 336 claims against other companies? We know that all ARM microprossors do not infringe on 584 and that was the only claim made so far against ARM.

These questions are probably better directed to PTSC or Hawk but I thought I would see if anyone on here had any answers first. I have been slacking on following the technology side of things and am trying to change that.