From memory, wasn't the problem down to the claim construction of claim 29? If so, with a "new" claim 29 won't a fresh Markman be required to give legal definition to the claim?

Perhaps you should have included the original ARM PR as well?

20 September 2007

ARM Technology Ruled To Not Infringe In TPL Patent Litigation

Court Order and Partial Judgement of Non-Infringement (490Kb .pdf)

ARM intervention in case to protect customers has resulted in Texas Court ruling invalidating ’584 patent assertions against ARM technology

CAMBRIDGE, UK – Sept. 20, 2007 – ARM [(LSE:ARM); (Nasdaq:ARMHY)] today announced that on September 12, 2007, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, passed a judgment of non-infringement in favor of ARM as to all claims asserted before that Court by TPL (Technology Properties Limited) in relation to US patent number 5,784,584 (’584).

ARM joined the litigation in September 2006 to stand alongside the co-defendants – who are ARM® licensees – and respond to specific accusations against the company’s technology. Following a claim construction ruling by Judge John Ward on June 15, 2007, TPL decided to voluntarily stipulate to non-infringement. The judgment removes all accused ARM processor families (including the ARM7™, ARM9™, ARM10E™, ARM11™ and Cortex™ microprocessor families) from the Texas litigation, thus removing ARM from the proceedings in the District Court.

“ARM is satisfied with the result of intervening in this litigation between TPL and several Japanese licensees of ARM technology to combat what ARM believed were ill-conceived infringement assertions against its technology,” said Phil David, general counsel, ARM.

Adding to this blow to the ’584 patent, David also noted that in the currently pending re-examination of the case, the US Patent and Trademark Office has adopted the claim construction proposed by TPL in the Texas litigation and has issued a first office action invalidating the claim asserted in the litigation in light of a large number of prior art documents.

Outside of the litigation, TPL continues to assert US Patent 5,440,749 against ARM technology. ARM believes that this patent is not infringed by any ARM technology and that it is also invalid.

About ARM
ARM designs the technology that lies at the heart of advanced digital products, from wireless, networking and consumer entertainment solutions to imaging, automotive, security and storage devices. ARM’s comprehensive product offering includes 16/32-bit RISC microprocessors, data engines, graphics processors, digital libraries, embedded memories, peripherals, software and development tools, as well as analog functions and high-speed connectivity products. Combined with the company’s broad Partner community, they provide a total system solution that offers a fast, reliable path to market for leading electronics companies. More information on ARM is available at http://www.arm.com.

ARM is a registered trademark of ARM Limited. ARM7, ARM9, ARM10E, ARM11 and Cortex are trademarks of ARM, Inc. All other brands or product names are the property of their respective holders. “ARM” is used to represent ARM Holdings plc; its operating company ARM Limited; and the regional subsidiaries ARM INC.; ARM KK; ARM Korea Ltd.; ARM Taiwan; ARM France SAS; ARM Consulting (Shanghai) Co. Ltd.; ARM Belgium N.V.; AXYS Design Automation Inc.; AXYS GmbH; ARM Embedded Technologies Pvt. Ltd.; ARM Physical IP, Inc.; and ARM Norway, AS.

ARM PRESS OFFICE: +44 208 846 0797

http://www.arm.com/news/18565.html

and TPL's reply,

The TPL Group Files Appeal to Reverse Markman Claim Construction for US '584 Patent in MMP Portfolio

Strategic Appeal Expected to Reverse Single US ‘584 “Instruction Groups” Claim Construction in US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

CUPERTINO, Calif.-- September 28, 2007 -- As planned, the TPL Group today announced it has filed an appeal to reverse the June 18, 2007 Markman ruling regarding the “instruction groups” claim construction for US Patent 5,784,584 (US ‘584) in the Moore Microprocessor Patent™ (MMP) Portfolio. The appeal closely follows the stipulation proposed by TPL for a judgment of non-infringement of US ‘584. TPL urged entry of the judgment in order to simplify and streamline the MMP Portfolio infringement trial in the US District Court in the Eastern District of Texas scheduled to take place in January 2008, and to enable an immediate appeal of the narrowly adverse Markman ruling regarding the single US ‘584 claim construction.

“As we have noted in prior public announcements, we believe that the claim construction for ‘instruction groups’ requires more scrutiny than the Texas Court was able to give it during the Markman hearing due to time and space constraints,” said Dan Leckrone, Chairman of The TPL Group. “Apart from the need for further scrutiny on this single claim construction, the Texas Court demonstrated great skill in dissecting and dealing with a very complex case over a 15-month period. We believe the June 18th Markman ruling overwhelmingly supports MMP Portfolio claims against Matsushita, Panasonic, JVC, Toshiba, and NEC entities.”

As a result of the stipulation requested by TPL, the Texas Court infringement trial will focus on only two US patents in the MMP Portfolio, the 5,809,336 and the 6,598,148. TPL asserts that the June 18th Markman ruling broadly confirmed the strength of MMP claims including the very significant affirmation of US 5,809,336 as applied to both modern PLL-based and non PLL-based systems.

Leckrone Asserts "Misleading ARM News Release"

Leckrone noted that ARM issued a news release on September 20, 2007 that “was misleading” in that it implied the Texas Court somehow passed a judgment of non-infringement in favor of ARM. In point of fact, it was TPL who initiated the partial non-infringement stipulation to pave the way for a speedier trial and TPL’s opportunity to appeal the single Markman ruling on the “instruction groups” claims construction. He declared, “The fact that TPL gave ARM a judgment of non-infringement was purely procedural as well as temporary until the reversal of the US ‘584 ruling.”

According to Leckrone, all ARM core families (ARM7, ARM9, ARM9E, ARM10E, ARM11) and the ARM Cortex microprocessor core family do infringe upon the US ‘584 as well as US 5,440,749 in the MMP Portfolio. He warned that all manufacturers of end user products using infringing ARM processors – with the exception of the 20 global manufacturers who have already purchased MMP Portfolio licenses – are infringers of technology protected by the MMP Portfolio. “The longer infringers wait to purchase an MMP license, the more they can expect to pay because our program is designed to reward first-movers in various industry categories.”

The sweeping scope of applications using MMP design techniques continues to encourage manufacturers of end user products from around the globe to become MMP licensees. Since January 2006, HP, Casio, Fujitsu, Sony, Nikon, Seiko Epson, Pentax, Olympus, Kenwood, Agilent, Lexmark, Schneider Electric, NEC Corporation, Funai Electric, SanDisk, Sharp Corporation, Nokia, Bull, LEGO Group, and Denso Wave have all purchased MMP Portfolio licenses.

About the MMP Portfolio

The Moore Microprocessor Patent Portfolio contains intellectual property that is jointly owned by the privately-held TPL Group and publicly-held Patriot Scientific Corporation (OTCBB: PTSC). The portfolio includes seven U.S. patents as well as their European and Japanese counterparts. It is becoming widely recognized that the jointly-owned patents protect fundamental technology used in designing microprocessors, microcontrollers, digital signal processors (DSPs), embedded processors and system-on-chip (SoC) devices. The MMP Portfolio is exclusively managed by Alliacense, a TPL Group Enterprise.

About The TPL Group

Founded in 1988, Technology Properties Limited (The TPL Group) has emerged as a global coalition of high technology enterprises involved in the development, management and commercialization of Intellectual Property (IP) assets as well as the design, manufacture and sales of proprietary products based on these same IP assets. Among the advanced products that The TPL Group enterprises continue to bring to market are system-on-chip solutions for distributed digital media processing applications. For more information, visit www.tplgroup.net.

On second thoughts, there was no way you would include the above as it singularly places the facts for discussion without any spin or dirt.

As to "honesty" I will simply refer you to my most recent message on the "Off Topic Forum"

E&OE

Be well