"Does this help?"

It identifies the last two settlements....that is not the probelm.

This 10Q statement is the problem....look at my list,it's in order of events as they unfold.

RE: 10Q 11-10-11.."As of September 30, 2011 we had licensed and settled with ten defendants, suspended the complaint against one defendant, and dismissed with prejudice, two additional defendants. Subsequent to September 30, 2011, we entered into two licensing and settlement agreements related to the Flash-R portfolio. The remaining four defendants were dismissed with prejudice, thereby ending the Colorado patent litigation case."

This is from a 10Q, and the only way that condition can happen, "licensed and settled with ten defendants" would be if Lecia is counted as a seprate settlement from Panasonic. It was closed out in the Panasonic settlemet as a Party to.

Otherwise, that 10Q would have to read 9 if Lecia is considered to be licensed under the Panasonic conclusion.

doni