< I stand by my comment of "who cares".>

Our litigants care. Did you not read what I said? They requested the recertified 584 to be reexamed. Which was rejected. And they appealed the rejection. They seem to care alot.

< I did not know our claim against Barco was only for the 584 infringement. >

That is news to me. Are you sure the 749 and 890 are not part of the litigation?

<My hunch is it would apply only for future use, not past infringement.>

I believe that has been communicated to us re the 584. And, thanks to the request for reexam supplied by Fish & Richardson, we know that new notices of infringement of the amended claim 29 have been sent out.

It is one thing not to care about a particular aspect of PTSC or MMP. However, It is another thing if someone is attempting to get others to feel the same way. And using misleading or untrue information to do it.

That last satement is not directed at you or anyone imparticular. But it does guide my responses most of the time.

Opty