"The fact that Ms. Hoppe even tried contacting EDIG indicates the re-exam was granted."

I don't see it that way. The problem is, RP gave POA to DM way back in May of 2007 regarding the published patent. When that consideration happened it did not correlate back to the original application. Correspondence should be coordinated between the application and the published patent through the continuity data....where apparently they do not look or make a comparison.

It's simple enough to review the complete history of application and the current patent status.

Any way, my money is on a decision not having been rendered yet regarding the re-exam.
doni