Regarding the statement that "it does not look good", Moore was able to give persuasive arguments before and as page 5 states based on Moores arguments the initial rejections were withdrawn. I have not read the entire non-final action and have not had a chance to read the examiners arguments based on the newly cited prior art. The examiner may be correct but I wanted to point out that when the previous non-final action was issued things did not look good either.