I understand why you are still skeptical, but pehaps you can be reassured by taking these steps.
Go to this link. It is from the Official Gazette from this past Tuesday, and is for the patents that have been through and concluded the exparte reexam process and the recertifaction has been granted for them. Click on any one of the patents on the left column and you'll see the Reexamination Certificate that was issued come up in the window on the right. Find the patent number at the top of the page usually in the text about 6 or 7 lines down.
http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/patog/week26/OG/ExParteReex.htm
Then take that number, and go in to the regular USPTO Pair site in the link below, fill in the security words and hit continue. Then punch that number in and click the patent number circle and hit search. Then go to the "Continuity Data" tab and find the Child Continuity Data with the most recent date and click on the linked application.
http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair
You'll see on the "Application Data" tab, the same "Reexamination Certificate Issued" under the status on that page. And you'll see the status date below it. Then click on the "Transaction History" tab and you'll see the same "Input Issue Number and Issue Date for Reexamination" entry that you see for the '584, and you'll see the same date as you saw under "status date" on the previous tab.
I think it's pretty clear that the '584 is successfully revalidated based on the current status and the comparison to these other ones that have already been published in the Official Gazette. The only thing, in my opinion, that is "up in the air" is the actual FINAL language that was agreed to as there was some back and forth after the "Notice to Issue Reexamination Certificate" from 4/21/09. When the '584 is published, we'll finally see the OFFICIAL amended patent. From there, it's up to TPL to maximize the fees in licensing it or if need be, litigating it. But based on the above, I think it's pretty clear the '584 has been recertified in some form, and likely very close to what we last saw just prior to 4/21/09.
