I believe that we will have to appeal. 60% of all re-examinations are using KSR guidlines for obviousness. The USPTO is going to concentrate on the obviousness test now whenever it can (IMO) As many here have mentioned the examiners claims for obviousness are weak and flawed, yet here we are. We will prevail in re-examination due to an appeal.

Our technology was, and is unique. It was an inventive step over anything that existed at the time. It was, and remains the main imputus behind the reved-up horsepower (so to speak) of the modern day microprocessor. it has been a commerically successful endevour after being scrutinized by hundreds of attorneys for our now customers. IT has been re-certified in Germany, a country well known and respected for it's engineering prowess. The only thing obvious about it would be the crime in not re-certifing it, which could lead to the creation of the new mafia- a bunch of patent thieves and their bought and paid for Harvard educated attorneys working in cohesion to reign in control ,for money and power, of innovative process, and to steal the dream of wealth through creativity of the individual inventor. After all this I just have to say" its un-American not to re-certify our patent."

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

GLTAL