As long as we are on the subject of the 336 reexam request, here are some thoughts that I have shared with some on this board.

If you go to page 125 you will see statements about Richter prior art being this or that, or containing this or that, not becuase the prior art says it, but because the requestor is saying that the patent owner said it is so in communications. Requestor uses the same approach in the other prior art as well.

Pay particular attention to item VII on page 16 of the 168 page filing and read through the top of page 17. You can stop where it says " if the patent owner's assertions are accepted,...."

Requestor is asking the PTO to do something they don't normally do. Requestor is asking the PTO to consider patent owner statements made while negotiating for a license. Usually they only accept statements made in court under oath. My guess is the PTO rejects on this basis alone. I just can't see the PTO going out on a fishing expedition when the intent of the filing is obvious. IMHO, all the examiner has to do is enforce the rule that states SNQs must only be based solely on patents and published material. However, while we wait for the PTO, the fact that a reexam request is pending might be useful on the litigation front. I believe that is the primary purpose.

GLTA, Opty