If in stating "no other claims" you're referring to actual numbered claims in the patent, this probably doesn't clarify anything, but if you're referring "generically" to claims of invalidity of the patent by a second party while an exisitng re-exam is already underway, this may help and refute what you're implying.

For example, the '584 was subjected to a re-exam request on October 19, 2006, regarding claim 29. A second and separate re-exam request was submitted on November 15, 2006, but also in regards to claim 29. For the first request, it was determined to that a re-exam should proceed on December 22, 2006. For the second request, it was determined that a re-exam should proceed on February 12, 2007. Later, these two requests were merged on June 14, 2007.

So if you intended "claims" generically meaning that if a re-exam was in process, any subsequent requests would entail a separate new re-exam, this seems to contradict that. If you intended "claims" as in if the second request had to do with claim 14 for example, then this doesn't clarify that, though I believe a similar scenario on the '336 may contradict even that. I'll let you know if I find that to differ.