" I believe this has occured in other settlements as well. "
yes, here's the first settlement for a case resolved "without" for a defendant ....
license 8... 8)...license 1...19. Referred to as “WOLVERINE” ( TIC Company, Inc.)( WOLVERINE DATA)-DONE without prejudice(doc 9NOTICE OF DISMISSAL..12/10/2009, no follow up court doc {1.26 months})...PR12/10/2009"announced today that it has entered into a royalty bearing license and settlement agreement with TIC Computer, Inc. doing business as Wolverine Data (Wolverine). Under the terms of the confidential agreement, Wolverine has agreed to make an undisclosed lump sum payment for past infringing sales and to pay a royalty for any on-going sales of products that practice e.Digital's U.S. Patent 5,491,774" ..),10Q 3rd 2010....fee to be paid in Nov...settled prior to 737 amendment. "We are pleased to announce our first royalty bearing '774 license agreement and the first settlement from our recently filed round of infringement actions,"
Pravda, from my years of observations, companies that settled with royalty bearing issues their case argued defences stayed intact where e.Digital then assumes some form of contract enforcement considerations.
Google, by way of IPR filings, has shown a settlement and license agreement, however, as you noted, e.Digital is rolling up the carpet with statements like, paraphrase .."No more infringement litigation for the foreseeable future".
I ask why as you did...with a little more input on the matter as to e.Digirtal being standoffish.
doni
