This is the part that I like best..

"[i]t is not sufficient that a request for reexamination merely proposes one or more rejections of a patent claim or claims as a basis for reexamination. It must first be demonstrated that a patent or printed publication that is relied upon in a proposed rejection presents a new, non cumulative technolical teaching that was not previously considered and discussed on the record during the prosecution of the application that resulted in the patent for which reexamination is requeted, and during the prosecution of any other prior proceeding involving the patent for which reexamination is requested" [Emphasis added..by the author]

Sounds like a high hurdle..especially with the "new, non cumulative" part of the teaching. Go back to the drawing board boys..and be creative this time and think up something that has not yet been presented for consideration..then maybe if not cumulative in nature..we will consider it. I also like that part that the requester would need to translate any documents that originated in another language. Get out your check book boys if you have something that needs to be translated!!

I hope that this is painful, combersome, and costs them a lot of money to perform..and by the way, we should move to a loser pays system for patents rexams IMO..if not substantially modiefied, the loser should pay the costs for slowing down the patent owners!!