Based on the documents from PAIR regarding reexamination control no. 90/008,225 (merged with 90/008,229) regarding the '584 patent, it would appear that claims 1-28 were not subject to reexamination, and that claim 29 is patentable as amended (noting the Comments on Statement of Reasons for Patentability and/or Confirmation by Patent Owner in their latest filing, to which I have not seen a follow-up document by the PTO). The interim claims 30 - 54, added during the reexamination, were subsequently withdrawn (canceled) by the Patent Owner.

In consideration of the above, it would follow that claim 29 is the only claim that would be amended, since it was the only claim subject to reexamination as I understand it from the PAIR documents. It would then appear that the latest motion by the Plaintiffs is an attempt at some legal slight-of-hand. Put another way, claim 29 IS the only claim amended, but claims 1-28 still remain in comprising the full patent.

Comment and/or correction from others here that are more knowledgeable in legal matters than I would be appreciated. My comment comes only from a common sense perspective.

DG