To be honest I was hoping for a finalization between Thanksgiving and New years....mostly due to the examiners getting their yearly ratings and bonuses based onwhat they accomplished during the year...sort of a self promotion for finalizing things that are near completion...when that didn't occur then it seemed to me that this examiner is saddled with a lot of responses that are due on the multiple and varied examples used for his stance of obviousness in these patents.

Normally when looking for a final verdict on the patents it usually takes 3-6 months till we can read on the PTO site the "intent to issue a reexam"....If I'm not mistaken we are in our 4th month and although this claim of obviousness is different from the others I have been involved with based on prior art...it would seem to me that he should be nearing his final verdict. Also involved is his communications with the patent holder on where he stands and why and of course you ususally have that 3-4 person meeting before anything is issued just to insure that whatever verdict is handed down is done in fairness and is justly proven...from either side of the verdict.

Although this is my first exposure to an examiner with a claim of obviousness it seems to me that he has had enough time to prove his verdict in writing within the 4-6 month period which would be anytime form now till mid February. If it takes longer than that then IMO there is a lot of back and forth going on between the PTO and PTSC/TPL...which IMO does not signal everything being as "assumed positive" as many now have taken that stance.

That being said, even if my est. of time is wrong by another 2-3 months I would gladly accept the delay for a positive result. If the examiner needs extra time to get our patents reissued in a positive manner....so be it...and gladly so..as long as we get out of it want we need and IMO deserve, as a verdict.

JMHO