There is still an issue of who filed re-exam, we have at least two different opinions.

richardo, you're doubting my DD prowess? LOL

I copied the proof from the USPTO website (yes, the same website murgirl1 got her DD from) and uploaded five USPTO pages to my box.net site here:

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

The USPTO-1 doc shows Patterson & Sheridan, LLP as the third-party re-exam requesters. The USPTO-2 doc shows Barden Todd Patterson and Nyweli Houston as the filers. The USPTO-3 document shows Mr. B. Todd Patterson of Patterson & Sheridan, LLP sending a Certificate of Service for the re-exam to Vaughn W. North of Thorpe North and Western since they were the attorneys of record identified to the USPTO for the '774 patent on 10/27/10. Mr. Patterson was following the USPTO proper rules of notification but of course knew DM was representing EDIG regarding that patent now. IMO he was being sneaky in his notification, perhaps hoping DM wouldn't find out about the re-exam. DM did find out and changed the attorney of record on the '774 patent on 11/22/10 as seen in USPTO-4 and USPTO-5 docs.