"The USPTO adopted and agreed to certain terms of the 584, the ones in Question the defendants agreed to at the Markman"

Only one claim in question, claim 29. Please see USPTO filing on 06/26/2007, page 3.

1a. "Claims 29 are subject to reexamination"

1b. "Claims 1-28 are not subject to reexamination".

"By telling the USPTO that the defendants agreed to those definitions at the Markman that leaves little room for doubt about the validity."

Yes, the defendants agreed to our claims 1-28, hence, they are not being reexamined by the USPTO as they adopted these 28 claims because both us and them agreed to all 28 claims. The claim in question is claim 29, which we battled over with ARM at the Markman and lost. This is why we removed ARM from the litigation and filed an appeal to have claim 29 reversed.

 "If the USPTO agrees And the Js at the Markman agree..... IMO = VALID!"

If the USPTO agrees with the J's interpretation of Claim 29 for the "584, we lose! The USPTO has not rulled on claim 29, so again, I am not following your logic.

Good luck to you, me, us, and all longs.