doni, you're right...I'm not certain the re-exam has actually begun since the only wording I've seen is that it's been assigned to an examiner. However, the excerpt below indicates the USPTO Director will evaluate re-exam requests and if granted, will begin the procedure. If denied, the request is terminated. If the request for re-exam by Patterson & Sheridan, LLP was denied, why would the USPTO assign the re-exam to Art Unit 3992? Why wouldn't they just terminate the request?

When a request for reexamination is filed, the USPTO Director will evaluate the request to determine if the submitted prior art raises a substantial new question of patentability. If the Director denies the request, his decision is final and not appealable. If granted, the PTO will begin the reexamination procedure.

I also found a document on the USPTO website dated 11/18/10 that clearly shows Sharon S. Hoppe of the USPTO tried to contact the patent owner (EDIG), through THORPE NORTH and WESTERN, and was unable to. That's of course because THORPE NORTH and WESTERN were not working for EDIG anymore and yet, they were still named as Power of Attorney at the USPTO. My guess is THORPE NORTH and WESTERN called EDIG and told them about the USPTO re-exam and EDIG notified DM immediately. It's more than coincidental that EDIG revoked THORPE NORTH and WESTERN's Power of Attorney regarding our '774 patent on 11/18/10 and DM accepted Power of Attorney same day. All future correspondence between USPTO and EDIG will be handled by DM. The fact that Ms. Hoppe even tried contacting EDIG indicates the re-exam was granted.

See USPTO-4, USPTO-5 and USPTO-6 (page 4) on box.net.

http://www.box.net/shared/bz4d8bjeok