But, a little correction. The extension you reference isn't for the P&A to be "valid". The P&A is valid.
As per the extension, and for the reporting done, it's for valuation of different elements of the P&A. It's been compared to your credit card agreement -- a legal contract -- allowing for _certain_ unilateral changes by your credit card company.
The P&A stands. Same thing. JPM and FDIC have a valid contract. However, the FDIC has certain unilateral changes that can be made, until they don't extend things.
This is why I fully expect the FDIC to extend the P&A -- makes no sense for them not to continue holding things over JPM's head.
But the contract itself is binding.
Your assumptions (#2 and #3 -- I didn't see a #1) are incorrect.