From the Tentative decision 3/29/11

The primary issue before this Court is how the Assignment Agreement, particularly

Section 2.1, is to be interpreted. Brown contends it's very simple; merely apply 3.5 percent to

the gross proceeds received by TPL or its designees, subject to the agreed carve-outs, and send

them a check. TPL contends that "gross" does not mean gross and that a reduction should be

taken for percentages owed inventor Charles Moore, other funders, and amounts received by

Patriot. It must be noted that in the only specific instance testified to at trial, where TPL made a

payment to Brown, the method of calculation was that being advanced by Brown which, years

later, was deemed to have been an error by Leckrone…….

The assignment references "gross proceeds" of the commercialization of the HHC/MMP

portfolio. Gross is total income before deductions. Proceeds is the amount of money received from a sale. Here the patents are licensed for use to third parties in exchange for which they

make payments to TPL and/or Patriot. The amount received, prior to any reduction for expenses

is the gross proceeds - to suggest otherwise would be to. tum a simple, explicit phrase (gross

proceeds) into "net" which means something entirely different.

All monies received by TPL or anyone it designates are gross proceeds. The only

"subtraction" that can be made is determined by whatever is the meaning and application of the

so-called "carve-outs."

…TPL contends that the joint venture with Patriot that resulted in the creation of PDS with

its expenses, withholdings, and the engagement of TPL as manager and marketer of the patents

is also a carve-out. The Court disagrees. All monies paid to TPL or its designees (e.g. PDS) are

subject to the application of the Browns' 3.5 percent interest.

FYI Brown acknowledges, however, the carve-out provisions of the assignment and testified

that those provisions would exclude in whole or part:

1) The AMD - Patriot proceeds because all such proceeds went to Patriot and none

to TPL;

2) The Texas agreement involving Japanese technology companies which became a

50/50 split between TPL and Patriot; and

3) Apple proceeds because the licensing agreement included patents in addition to

the MMP package.