I think the reason they are holding out is that they are testing the USPTO's handling of the new guidelines for obviousness. After all that is what most of the reexam request are seeking. Multiple prior art used in conjuction with each other. So far we seem to be winning. And while on that subject have there been any developments with PTO on the 148 patent recently that would lead TLP to offer a covenant not to sue on the 148 ?

From Wolf's recent pacer posting:

http://agoracom.com/ir/patriot/forums/discussion/topics/409319-new-pacer-answer-and-counterclaims-to-complaint-for-declaratory-judgment/messages/1349510#message

"14. Responding to paragraph 14 of the Complaint, Defendants admit there is an actual, substantial and justicia le controversy between the parties as to the ‘336, ‘749, and ‘890 Patents. Defendants further admit that, on March 15, 2010, TPL offered Sirius XM a covenant not to sue on the ‘584 and ‘148 Patents and thus deny there is an actual, substantial and justiciable controversy between the parties with regard to these two patents. Except as so expressly admitted, denied."

Question: Have there been any developments with PTO on the 148 patent recently that would lead TLP to offer a covenant not to sue on the 148 ?