While I agree with most/all here that the PTO re-exam (and re-exam, and re-exam) process is a tad ridiculous, you IMO really need to step back and think the whole thing through.

IF the PTO denies a request for re-exam based on some prior art that has not yet been fully examined, it makes us more vulnerable in the long run. That denied prior art would become fodder for adversaries in a courtroom situation, where they can confuse the issue, and the jury, with banter about how the prior art (valid or not) renders the patent invalid or calls into question whether there is actual infringement.

Now, with this in mind, the PTO IS THE VENUE WE WANT to address the prior art claim. With the PTO in an ex parte re-exam, the cards are stacked in our favor. Our voice is the only one heard. And we should only have to pursuade one (actually 4) person of supposed knowledge, not 12 ignorant jurors. No cross examination by a clever attorney.

And, IMO, once the claims have been overcome at the PTO, it would be mighty difficult for a courtroom adversary to make any hay of it. It becomes (should become) a dead issue.

So be pissed at the PTO. But think how much more pissed you'd be if the PTO denied the request, we find ourselves in court with an infringer(s), and they are successful in using that same prior art claim against us. Yup, we could appeal - and wait years. I'd think I'd rather wait for a re-exam than experience the courtroom drama.

JMHO, and this I actually think I KNOW!

SGE