hereafter, this case should resume as quickly as possible. As shown by the three additional requests for reexamination filed just since the Motions to Stay were first brought in early May, either the litigants, their unidentified allies, or others interested in thwarting TPL’s abilities to license its MMP portfolio are determined to tie up the patents in an endless stream of requests for reexamination. Furthermore, the PTO has made it clear that the more than 700 references asserted against the ‘336 patent by the five different petitioners4 is not only exhaustive but not relevant, and will not be further considered. 4 As noted in the description of the reexamination proceedings above, TPL submitted the Plaintiffs’ prior art references disclosed in this litigation relative to the ‘749 and ‘148 patents to the PTO for consideration during the reexamination process.