Opty, I thought I read it somewhere concerning the 336 I have looked and can't find it now. I will look again tomorrow. The stipulation of non infringement was however narrow in scope and specifically stipulated that they do not infringe based on the claims construction of the J3 case in EDOT. This was done to streamline the case.So unless I am way off base the new Markman hearing in NOCAL will bring the 584 back in play for us against ARM at least in this venue. This is an old excerpt from the EE Times.

In a further move to simplify and streamline the Moore Microprocessor Patent™ (MMP) Portfolio infringement trial in the US District Court in the Eastern District of Texas, The TPL Group today announced that it will ask the Court to enter a partial judgment of non-infringement as to certain products. Accordingly, the proposed partial judgment will:

• Stipulate that "instruction groups" claim elements of the accused claim of US Patent 5,784,584 (US '584) be deemed non-infringed for the purpose of this trial, based on the Court's claim interpretation, thereby allowing appeal from this claim interpretation ruling to be initiated immediately, rather than waiting until the end of trial.
• Stipulate that all accused ARM core families (ARM7, ARM9,ARM9E, ARM10E, ARM11), as well as the ARM Cortex microprocessor core family, are non-infringed under the Court's claim interpretation of "instruction groups," thereby removing ARM as an intervener in the Texas Court trial.

GL