Not to dispute Eggbert's respected opinion, it may not even take two weeks. They have all the ammunition delivered on a platter, and that this point - with that ammo - all the examiner should really need to do is verify what was stated by Henneman. That, IMO, should be pretty simple. Was this newly claimed stuff already looked at or not?

As for being thorough, I recall that our team (Henneman) was very thorough, perhaps to the extreme, near the end of the last re-exam of the '336, submitting volumuous documentation for inclusion in the '336 PTO file as a pre-emptive measure against future concerns/re-exam requests. That examiner has already "handled" all that paper.

It would seem that all that the examiner would need to do is, again, verify Henneman's input, draft appropriate (largely boiler-plate) paper/forms, meet with a peer (hopefully, and logically, the prior examiner) and supervisor in the unit to perform a review, and process the paper. With luck, the action would be to terminate the re-exam - killing things immediately. Otherwise, action would be to do an NIRC, which would hit almost immediately, but cause the formality of the wait for publication in the Gazette (though I would think all interested parties would recognize the NIRC as a "done deal").

They've done the Litigation Search, and should be keenly aware of pending/actual litigation hinging to a large degree on PTO action. They should be in "expedite mode".

So, how long? IMO with acknowledged ignorance, a matter of hours. It would seem that the only significant hurdle would be scheduling/meeting with peer/supervisor. But that meeting, I would think, would go PDQ when conducted if the prior examiner were a participant.

I'm now checking status multiple times a day. But, on the other hand - as Eggbert opines - it could take weeks, but I don't think we're talking months any more.

JMHOs,

SGE