Thanks for the IMO very thourough and well articulated thoughts on the process and what could be transpiring at the USPTO...I very much appreciate the time you have taken to explain the process and very much hope you are right. I am still holding PTSC stock so I am betting that you are, and hoping that RG's letter supports your thoughts when he basically said the process takes a while, and that statistics show that we have a good chance of coming out of this in a strong position. With that said, in reading the rules for the re-exam process, and not being able to have access to all of the documents that we submitted to the USPTO examiner, it is IMO possible that the examiner is using information provided by the J's which contributed to the examiners search resulting in new identified prior art and the latest non-fnal rejection. Even though this is an ex-parte reexam, meaning that we are the only ones communicating with the examiner on this case (which is very much in our favor), it is still our duty to fully disclose all prior art information that we are aware of, meaning IMO, if we submit information obtained from discovery in Texas, it is from both sides, us and the J's. So, in short, because we can't see everything, we truly don't know how/why/what is transpiring, therefore I am taking a "Leap of Faith" by holding on. I really believe/hope we will be OK, but I like to also approach things from all angles in my attempt to prepare myself for whatever happens. (-:

Thanks again emt...I very much appreciate and look forward to your posts!

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