One point that has never been discussed is what are JPM's cpas going to do with JPM financials. The missing exhibit on the fdic's sales agreement casts a doubt as to whether title to the bank assets were really conveyed to JPM. The fact that the holding company's assets are deeply interwined with the bank assets is another problem for the cpa. The cpa firm is not going to go out on a limb for JPM imho until these matters are resolved. Is the cpa going to sign off on the write downs JPM wants to make under these circumstances. I think not. Can JPM afford to have its financials delayed? Although it is true the fdic and JPM can reform or correct their agreement, perhaps the fdic has chosen not to so the indemnification clause can't be used against them. Perhaps in the last few months the fdic and jpm have become adversaries over this mess. Maybe the fdic is at a point where it wants to argue that the agreement conveyed nothing to jpm and auction WM bank off to others to prevent lawsuits.As to the 4 billion, the settlement agreement is binding between JPM and the holding company. The fdic has no claim when they objected to the stipulation, and after all these weeks the holding company will be able to point out that the fdic still has no claim. jmho.