So is it your position that the license revenue from the Apple MMP license has already been recognized in the PTSC financials? If not, what's your perspective on that?

Last quarter, there was only 1 license (Stryker) that was publicly announced. That brought in $2.24M in license revenue. Based on the previous licenses announced last fiscal year, that was far above the "average" fee, if it was indeed for just one license. I suspect it covered at least 3 licenses based on other supporting information from the PRs and court filings.

We know from the company that they are not announcing every (or potentially any) of the licenses that are signed. With that in mind, considering there were 11 licenses sold in FY11 of which only 3 were announced publicly, and there haven't been any announced since the FY ended. I certainly expect that they continued to sell licenses during the first quarter, just as they had during the entire time we were suing them. So I certainly expect license revenue to be reported with this 10q. I'm surprised that you don't.

Additionally, since most have argued against my position that the Apple license revenue was likely recognized in last year's financials, I would think that those people would expect with the settlement that the money would either appear in the first quarter's financials or would be mentioned in the subsequent events section due to the expected size of such a license.

As for your description of the results of the settlement, you certainly show unreasonable optimism with respect to what has been gained, in light of previous performance of those involved on both sides. What's your basis for that other than a vague PR?