NOTE: ThiS order is nonprecedential United States Court of AppeaIs for the FederaI Circuit MICROPROCESSOR ENHANCEMENT CORPORATION AND MICHAEL H. BRANIGIN, Plaintiffs-Appellan,ts, V. BUG LABS, INC., Defendan,t-Appellee. 2010-1474 Appeal from the United States Dist1'ict C0urt for the Centra1 Dist1'ict of Ca1if0rnia in case n0. 09-CV-()607, Judge Stephen V. Wi1s0n. MICROPROCESSOR ENHANCEMENT CORPORATION AND MICHAEL H. BRANIGIN, Plain,tiffs-Appellan,ts, V. EMULEX CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. 2010-1475

MICROPROCESSOR V. BUG LABS 2 Appea1 from the United States DiStrict Court for the Centra1 District of California in case no. 09-CV-0605, Judge Stephen V. Wi1son. MICROPROCESSOR ENHANCEMENT CORPORATION AND MICHAEL H. BRANIGIN, Plaintiffs-Appellants, V. TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED, Defendcmt-Appellee, ' - and ARM LTD., Defendan,t-Appellee. 2010-1476 Appea1 from the United States District Court for the Centra1 District of California in case no. 08-CV-1123, Judge Stephen V. Wi1son. MICROPROCESSOR ENHANCEMENT CORPORATION AND MICHAEL H. BRANIGIN, Plain,tiffs-Appellants, V. MINDSPEED TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant-Appellee,

3 MICROPROCESSOR V. BUG LABS and ARM LTD., Defen,dant-Appellee. 2010-1477 Appea1 from the United States District Court for the Central District of Ca1ifornia in case no. 09-CV-0603, Judge Stephen V. Wi1son. MICROPROCESSOR ENI'IANCEMENT _, t CORPORATION AND MICHAEL H. BRANIGIN, `- Plaintiffs-Appellants, ' V. ARCHOS, INC., Defendant~Appellee. 2010-1479 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central DiStriot of Ca1ifornia in case no. 09-CV-0606, Judge Stephen V. WilS0n. MICROPROCESSOR ENHANCEMENT CORPORATION AND MICHAEL H. BRANIGIN, Plaintiffs-Appellants, V.

MICROPROCESSOR V. BUG LABS 4 STMICROELECTRONICS NV AND STMICROELECTRONICS, INC., Defendants-Appellees, and ARM LTD., Defendant-Appellee. 2010-1484 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in case no. 0_§-CV;103_9, Judge Stephen V. Wilson. - ~ ON MOTION ORDER Upon consideration of Microprocessor Enhancement Corporation and Michael H. Branigin’s motions to volun- tarily withdraw their appeals, IT ls ORDERED THAT: (1) The motions are granted and these appeals are dismissed. (2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

5 DEC 29 2010 cc: s21 Date Roderick G. Dorman, Esq. Blaney Harper, Esq. Bruce S. Sostek, Esq. Joseph E. Thomas, Esq. Kevin P. Anderson, Esq. Gary N. Frischling, Esq. Chad S. Campbell, Esq. 1v11cRoPRocEssoR v. BUo. mss FOR THE COURT fs/ J an Horbaly J an Horbaly Clerk lL£ "*M§sa§:ser°“ 050 2 9 2010 .W|HOHBA|.¥ ClEHl _, ;\ lssued As A Mandate: 2