I noticed that the wording regarding signaling and the second clock is different than what was originally proposed. I think the reexam request that was denied was going to challenge the new wording with Uhlenhoff prior art. And I believe the revised wording takes care of it. So the examiner was paying attention to the stuff in these reexam requests even though they are not officially recognized. This is good. And we have to thank White and Case for making it possible to head off a future reexam.

Back to rereading.

Opty