As you point out...regarding the two comments of interest in the 18 page entry on the reexam of 336

The first one was where they used the examiners advice to clarify the meaning of "independent...

Remember that this is only pertaining to the added claim numbers 11-20 and does not in any way amend the claims 1-10....11-20 parallel 1-10 except for that definition of independent by the examiner.

Also note that definition by the examiner, as we entered it into those additional claims, contains as written... a"limitation"...in the examiners position for the meaning of said term..."independent"

It looks like we want our cliams 1-10 to stand with the term independent as we describe it...but for negotiations sake we added the other claims appended as the patent examiner suggested...even with that limitation as stated ...but it also states we want our original claims...unamended...and "reconsideration of those original claims is "earnestly requested"

IMO what we might see is a reexam issued with the original 1-10 denied and 11-20 issued in a reexam certification....all we can hope is that the "limitation" that is included in the examiners definition of "independent" doesn't weaken our "bite" on 336...it might, or even open up a can of worms that our lawyers don't want to fight in court. Thus the earnest request for reconsideration and the same time an addition of 10 new claims that incorporate the examiners wishes on the indepent definition...

It would easily explain the long time period for this to get reissued...IMO there are probably a lot of meetings with the PTO and back and forth verbal negotiations to get these claims issued in such a way where we satisfy the examiner and his contentions and at the same time get a reissued patent with claims that do not weaken our demands for licensing....

JMHO