That is a very interesting take on this. IF our team "fed" the PTO with this possible prior art concern, then they should be equipped to combat it (in advance).

Also interesting is the apparent fact that the current concern on the both the '148 and '336 revolves around the same thing (as I suggested may be possible).

I just love the positive thoughts. TPL not only aware in advance, but probably prepared in advance. If nothing else, it makes my hopeful nearer term timeline look better!

Only question/thought: IF TPL "fed" the PTO, would/could they not have also provided combatting arguments concurrently (thus possibly expediting things)? Perhaps that's not a kosher approach.

And perhaps it's not a smart strategic approach. Feed 'em, let them come up with their issues (if any, and obviously there were), and focus directly on the cited issues (rather than trying to "shot gun" with counterarguments in advance/with the "feed", which may open doors to further concerns/issues).

It'll be interesting to read the non-final on the '336.

BTW, do we know if the second/final examiner supervisor for the '148 is the same guy working/supervising the '336? (answer desired for everyone else's edification).

Thanks!

SGE