You write as if the '336 has been refused certification. It has not. The examiner has presented a case for obviousness.

As I have stated before, engineers both here on this board and also those in the international community will have read those grounds and come to a conclusion as to the veracity of those findings.

It is more to do with understanding engineering concepts than KSR obviousness, in my very humble opinion.

If the conclusions as to obviousness are based on a flawed understanding, as articulated by respected posters on this board with the required technical background, the findings are erroneous and the examiner will have to either recant and confirm the patent, or adhere to the version presented and undermine his skill and authority at an appeal.

I say confirm the patent, as the examiner has exhausted all avenues presented in the final rejection for prior art and obviousness.

Be well