When I last researched what prior art had already been considered, I missed stuff. It would appear that all the prior art in the new reexam is part of the record as of Nov 24th. I thought IC master was missing from the record, but it is included in the 55 page listing of prior art that the examiner had considered when he issued the NIRC. It is listed as Fairchild Micro IC master. I was looking for IC master not Fairchild Micro. But the exact pages are referenced. And because the exact pages are noted that means that Sam Rimell included everything in his NIRC that was in the request for reexam that was returned incomplete.

If I understand the process, all that prior art in that 55 page listing becomes part of the cert which has been issued. If you read the NIRC, the examiner specifically mentioned Kato, Ledzius, Ikeda and McDermott as being the closest prior art but they fall short. He also states "Additionally, these features are not present in the remaining prior art of record."

On Nov 14th the examiner made statements like Mostek and IC master were not of record in the file of the '336 patent and are not cumulative to the art of record in the original file. Now that a reexam cert has been issued on Nov 24th, which ought to contain all the prior art of record, I'm wondering if the examiner can make the same statement?

Might we decide to issue a statement even before any office action? It seems to me we might be able to short circuit the process.

All IMHO, Opty