Hat Tip to Nelson. BB v FBAccording to the court filing where BB and FB formalize their intention to negotiate a settlement:The process of resolving disputes between BB and FB and its subs resulted from a January 13 meeting and a January 14, 2021 document initiated by the one who brought the action, BB. In the form of an interlocutory agreement. The purpose of this type of agreement is to enhance judicial economy (the courts 'like' when parties resolves disputes outside of the court, as in the January 13, 2021 meeting it is presumed). The BB (8,429,236 ) patent represents all patents for the sake of proceeding to a 'global agreement' between the two parties on all patents. Both the court and FB must agree and do agree according to the document, that they will proceed to settle privately.Its in process that's why no announcement can be made.BB as the agreement issuer preserves all rights to contest, appeal, or other legal remedies in the event a settlement is not reached in this or any other dispute with FB and its subsidiaries. Its use of this this type of document is to extend the date for resolution from today to some future date.This order relates to less than half of the issues. FB and BB are attempting to resolve all issues. The order can be revised to include all disputes. No party vacates its rights during this process according to the doc. if they can't agree.February 11, 2021 or as close to that date as possible, the judge (Wu) will hear about the agreement reached.The other use of an interlocutory document and its content, (like what the market is relying upon to increase the price of BB shares (the share price increasing recently)) is to prevent damage in the negotiation process caused by either party for example when affected property is sold or forfeited (change in material state that affects the value).So the parties have announced a settlement for review by the courts sometime after February 11, 2021 but have this document:gov.uscourts.cacd.703149.677.0.pdfas a backstop.So the question is, who is intending to change their affected technologies so as may change the value of the property? I can think of four things that FB is involved in:US Gov Section 230 discussionsThe roll-out of WhatsApp for businessAnti trust talks in the USAnti-trust talks in the EU wrt LibraI can't think of a single thing BB is working on why they would need to settle today.I think FB needs to settle to have the flexibility to do the things they want to, or need, to do.There is nothing that says 'I am a monopoly and bully everyone smaller than me' than FB ($ 775 Billion in value) beating up BB ($ 4.2 Billion) in court, especially using purchased patents to attempt to hold a gun to #$%$ head.