"...I do believe as Nez's email response from PTSC said, there aren't many catalogs remaining. The question is, are there anymore after this reexam. Maybe someone who attends the SHM can get them to answer some of those questions b.c they, I am sure, know how much more prior art is out there...."

Perhaps an answer to that question will include the rationale behind the apparent unwillingness to use the German (European) patent as leverage against infringers (note I did say 'apparent' because maybe they are using it). Possibly the answer will be that the strategy is to dot every 'i' and cross every 't' at the USPTO before using both barrels on infringers (mix those metaphors!). Fair enough if that's the case but need it be a secret, other than it seems to be the ingrained MO that shareholders are told nothing about MMP strategy? At least no one has said yet that the MMP will not be a subject for discussion.

The Oct 5 PR trumpeted a 'wave' of signings but it seems to have reverted to the usual dribble of one or two a month. Was TPL unreasonably optimistic in assuming that there wouldn't be any more successful calls for re-exam when the 'wave' declaration was made? Or is a bigger fee the reason which is making infringers think twice before paying? Flowers' stated need to "conserve resources" suggests not. We'll find out in the next Q which, outside of any PR in the meantime, may give the best indication of whether or not it's worth attending the SHM.

Sunday maunderings.