The rejected 584 reexam in on IFW. See 90/009591. The examiner included the following statement

<The positions allegedly taken by the patent holder in confidential license negotiations are not a proper basis for a request for exparte reexam because they are not "prior art patents or printed publications" nor do they explain the contents or pertinent dates of such prior art patents or printed publications>

The 336 request for reexam 90/009457 also relies on patent holder statements. If you discard anything that requester claims with respect to patent holder assertions, none of the prior art is exactly what the requester claims. I honestly don't see how the examiner is going to use that prior art. IMHO the only way he could use it is to go out of his way to spend time researching it and luckily uncovers something that the requestor overlooked that helps validate the prior art as being what the requester claims. Be interested in what others think.

GLTA, Opty