The only possible result of such research that might have some benefit to me would be a close to unanimous determination that the critical claims of both the 148 and 336 would not make it, even through appeals. I do not think it helps much if there is less than unanimous opinions.

The reason a positive result would not have any impact on me, is because I'm already in too deep and will not get in any deeper, no matter how positive the research might be. I suspect that might be the case for many of the people posting here.

So paying for research in the hope for unanimous negative results, seems perverse to me. Perhaps that is why you are not finding much interest here? Your plan might have more luck with potential new investors.

Personally, I do think both patents will overcome prior art. What is more difficult to determine is whether any of the specific claims in either patent are obvious. How would anyone go about making that determination in advance? Is there presently a clear definition of what consitutes obviousness that we can just apply to the second OA? Or does it really depend on how that question is argued by the patent owner? I believe the patent owner's non-obviousness argument will be the significant deciding factor. That is where I will be looking.

All IMHO Opty