Pretty bad that I made that mistake, but pretty funny too when you think about it.
Regarding the Katie Holmes not being signed thing, the source is a bit dubious, so I'll believe it when I see it. Interestingly enough, in all of this Katie Holmes/Tom Cruise tabloid hype, I've gotten the sense that she's not the one running off at the mouth about it. Tom is. It's why I have no desire to see War of the Worlds. As much as I like Spielberg, thinking he's not only a good filmmaker but a decent guy (in spite of being a billionaire), I don't want to pad Tom Cruise's bottom line -- and therefore his ego -- any further.</run on sentence>
Katie looks to me like she's been a deer in headlights with this whole Tom Cruise thing, and I keep thinking she'll be the next runaway bride when she realizes (a) the guy is crazy as a s#!thouse rat and (b) he's actually going to hurt her career by association.
Whatever the case, all of the media attention hasn't hurt Batman Begins' numbers, so I doubt the suits are all that upset by all the press coverage she's been getting. Ultimately it will boil down to one thing only: Does Christopher Nolan want her back for the sequel? If he's pleased with her performance on set (whether the camera was on or not) and thinks he can do more with her character, then she'll be back. Leaking information like she won't be back is a common studio tactic for keeping a rising star's ego in check. Reference Toby Maguire almost losing Spider-Man 2 or the supporting cast of CSI getting their pink slips. Tom Cruise could well be telling Katie that WB needs to up their ante for her, and they'd wisely say "woman, you aren't THAT important to the storyline."
That said, it would be a shame to lose the character over backroom politics. I stand by my earlier post; having the same female interest throughout the trilogy will give us a reason to give a damn about the catalyst of BvS.