Don't take this the wrong way, as I applaud yours and others' willingness to take whatever action you can with the USPTO. I only wish that carried over to your outlook on PTSC, which you actually own and control as a shareholder.

That being said, while I know that it's our opinion and position that the USPTO's latest re-exam should never have been granted and includes no SNQ's, how exactly does our situation differ from any of the other multiple re-exams that are being handled by the USPTO. Are you and the letter writers REALLY that familiar with the USPTO rules and procedures that you can categorically convey that what has happened with our '336 is completely out of the norm and worthy of "suspicion of illegal activity".

When you consider the millions of US patents that exist, and the hundreds of thousands that are in play each year either through original application/grant or re-exam process, is our one patent and the process that it has been subjected to that much of an anomaly? Are the letters you've received in which you got the "immediate desired results" more than the standard response script for letters to the USPTO?

Again, this isn't to critique your efforts or complain or diminish them. Simply, considering that my exposure to the USPTO is limited mainly to the research and experiences I've had with PTSC, I certainly don't consider myself and expert in it, and wouldn't even say I'm conversant with their procedures or policies on anything but a very cursory level. Even if you or others on the letter writing team are 10x more informed on the USPTO process, can you point to numerous other examples that prove that the '336 process is the exception rather than the rule?

Considering we're dealing with a HUGE BUREACRACY, and one that is getting MORE stressed than LESS, my opinion is that what is happening to the '336 is S.O.P. for these types of issues.

The letter of written regulations and the actual practical application often differ considerably, and especially when talking about public agencies, in my experience. I'd appreciate any real world references that you or others in "your group" (had to throw that in for optik's sake, lol....it does sound as childish here as when he posts it, lol) can provide, that show that the '336 has been subjected to a process so out of the norm, that suspicion of illegality is warranted.

It's from that angle that I think ease and others may be coming. More importantly though, it is from that angle that I think emtnester viewed the latest re-exam request, and warned that it would be likely another 9 months or more (going from memory here) of process at the time it came up. Warnings that many, including me, didn't want to heed, but that in retrospect, seem to be spot on.