As pointed out - the PTO portal is back online today. Thankfully it is also faster than it has been in months. Only time will tell whether it is because of faster setup or temporarily lower traffic.
For each patent I list the reexamination application number, the patent, the significant action(s) and the date(s)
All 11 of the reexaminations are still open.
Speculative address translation family (Belgard patents)
1) 90/008,722 for 5,895,503 reexam ordered 8/16/2007
2) 90/008,723 for 6,226,733 reexam ordered 9/1/2007
3) 95/000,257 for 6,430,668 inter partes reexam ordered 8/22/2007, all claims rejected in first office action 11/20/2007, patent amended by TMTA 01/22/2008, all claims still rejected in Action Closing Prosecution 6/24/2008, but on less grounds. TMTA responded in timely fashion on 8/27/2008 , but response is not online, so it is unclear what this response says.
4) 95/000,275 for 6,813,699 inter partes reexam ordered 8/22/2007, all claims rejected in first office action 11/20/2007, patent amended by TMTA 01/22/2008, all claims still rejected in Action Closing Prosecution 6/24/2008, but on less grounds. TMTA responded in timely fashion on 8/31/2008 , but response is not online.
Instruction Scheduling family
5) 90/008,691 for 5,737,624 reexam ordered 8/13/2007
6) 90/008,712 for 5,974,526 reexam ordered 8/29/2007
7) 90/008,573 for 6,289,433 reexam ordered 5/11/2007
Multiple typed register family
8) 90/008,585 for 5,493,687 reexam ordered 6/12/2007
9) 90/008,644 for 5,838,986 reexam ordered 6/26/2007
10) 90/008,569 for 6,044,449 reexam ordered 5/11/2007
Adaptive power control
11) 95/000,243 for 7,100,061 inter partes reexam ordered 06/26/2007,all claims rejected in first office action 06/26/2007, patent amended by TMTA 08/30/2007, Intel response 09/26/2007, all claims still rejected in Action Closing Prosecution 7/3/2008, but on less grounds. TMTA had until 9/3/2008 to respond, but lack of response on the website could be administrative delay - fact of response for 95/000,275 was posted one week after deadline, but was still ruled timely.
Actions Closing Prosecution are a NON-FINAL conclusion to the reexamination. If TMTA feels the current answer is not satisfactory, they can offer amendments to the patents, or make arguments on why the previous rejections did not follow the law. If they miss the deadline for response, the decision will become final.
My BO required disclosure: Even though it doesn't make any difference to the current state of things that I just listed, even if there is a final rejection, TMTA would have the chance to appeal.