The PR quote:

"We have been able to substantiate much of the IP through initial silicon validation, with several devices in volume production through original equipment manufacturer customers."

What is it about the word "customers" that you don't understand? Do you not understand the word "through"?

And even if the scenario is as you depict, and production was outsourced and product brought in to NP for NP to sell to others, don't ya think it might be smart to include a license in the outsource production contract to limit use of NP tech to that one project for NP, so that the manufacturer doesn't use the newly-learned tech in separate production of product for themselves/others? I will grant you this, contractually, they could impose limitations that would not consitute a formal license via a limitations clause - which would essentially be a license, as it would permit incorporation of the specified/patented tech in the one production run, but may not even mention the patents specifically.

But now riddle me this. If it is as you depict, why would they go to multiple original equipment manufacturer customers? One for each device? Maybe....

I'll let others judge who makes the stronger argument. But it just an argument, and it's possible you are right on the money, and I'm all wet. My thought is tested - thank you.

Cuz I KNOW nuttin' - and that's why I attach the "IMO".

SGE