Marc,

The more I think about it and read about patents and reexams the more convinced I become that what the company needs (and what we need) is a court verdict in our favor against a patent(s) violator. Until that time we will suffer under the cloud of "gamesmanship" in the PTO reexam process.

I have also discovered why we only get 10 cents on the dollar from those companies that do purchase our licenses. They threaten to initiate a reexamanation. Here's what Raymond A. Mercado wrote about that.

Yet gamesmanship of the reexamination process has,
in the view of some, becomemore the rule than the
exception. Reportedly it has become “standard
procedure” that a defendant in patent litigation
“take an aggressive stance by saying it plans to
request a re-exam on that patent-in-suit or even
all” of the plaintiff’s patents. The threat of
reexamination is then used as leverage in licensing
negotiations, intimidating patent-holders into
settling out of court for lower amounts than those
to which the value of their patents might entitle them.
Third-party requesters are savvy about the
consequences of reexamination on the enforceability
of patents, and they know that the threat of filing
reexamination is often effective. As the Executive
Director of the Public Patent Foundation (a non-profit
organization that files reexaminations against patents
it deems questionable) has explained, a patent in
reexamination is “like a lame duck president . . . [h]e’s
technically president, but does Congress really need to
negotiate with him to get things passed?” In conferring
“lame-duck status” to a patent, reexamination can
essentially render the patent right void in the eyes of
all those wishing to make use of the invention without
compensating the patent owner.

from: page 11 - Section II - Overview (starting with the last sentence on the page)
http://lockwoodreexam.com/The_Use_and_Abuse_of_Patent_Reexamination_-_Raymond_A__Mercado.pdf

Until we obtain a court victory against a patent violator, 17 reexams may turn into 30 or whatever number it takes to run us out of either time or money.

Wow, talk about throwing cold water. I'm sorry but that's where I'm at right now and I'm down six figures too.

Here's to some how, some way a change in the reexam process or a successful court decision against a patent(s) violator and the future looking brighter for PTSC.

I am hopeful, DW