I would say so...

However for the Eye−Fi, Inc. consideration...

My prior post RE: "Notice of Withdrawal Of Rule 11 Motion;" by e.Digital.,

With subsequent order regarding EDIGs Rule 11 Motion/withdrawal...order "Dismissing Defendant's 35 Motion for Sanctions as Moot"

IMO, EDIG gets the do-over on “Notice of Settlement” as a penalty regarding the defendant’s motion for Sanctions…for whatever improprieties defendant accused/considered against Handal.

Or perhaps Handal considered, “the hell with penalties, lets get on with it, however the previous Notice of settlement is dead , we start over.…OK?”.

The order “as Moot” suggests this scenario.

Handal has shown something to the defendant ...mutually killing the "Sanctions" issue.

Got to be the tentative claims construction order....

doni