After further thought, I am certain the settlement with Asustek stands as announced.

The later Pacer that included Asustek's name in the heading is because their name is included in the "official" case name. I believe this happened with Sony when the case was against the J4. After Sony settled, it took awhile for the courts to remove Sony's name from the "official" case name. After it was removed it then became the case against the J3. Mystery solved IMO.