that was just let me ask you a question so that i can figure out where we are looking let's suppose that hypothetically and i know we're going to hear argument about this that the board that was his conclusion from the chirping also to me and stove now it's clear at ten thirty nine he used the words relied upon the phrase  that's four thousand true four thousand four and that the sole dictionary definition could ever live for the conclusion didn't i indicate that taking the place of an english language that was a definit issues the structural difference it is easier to bring the grounds to the parent from the outside through a ground connection right that gives you low inductance you have the hand and you have the pain terminated by a wind coming from i'm sorry i'm looking at these two sentences and and maybe i don't understand the technology but the way these two sentences read to me it says a common ground connection is normally terminated along a long after yes right pen yes well why doesn't that disclose exactly what you think you improve the part because when you bring the ground into the pen first of all that's an electrical concept it says the ground ground as a a common ground connection well that's just point or i mean it's talking about a common ground connection is normally along the edges the second sentence says but it can also be brought to the parents but in edge go round is preferred i'd like you to look at m lead to the word also that technology is one thing the words are another the word the term common ground connection is a connection that kind of clear connection twent is the pharaoh i would invite the court now or later to look at figures fourteen and twenty seven of stevenson fourteen is the rectangular design twenty seven is the circular one and both of those the figure twenty six of stevenson this is one where they've done a cut out of the circular ray where you can actually see where ground pin can go in there in the slot that's marked g one forty foot out the figure twenty six and we have testimony from our experts your honor that says yes that's exactly how you would do it you would bring the ground then right to the barrel and connect it that's an easy thing to do i can cite to back fourteen thirty as one example of some of the expert testimony that board and are now well identified by us and lied on by the board for a number of things our expert first mentioned that if you use pins for your grounds that allows you to have multiple redundant pins multiple redundant ground that provides for better grounding and also redundant grounding in case there's a problem with one of the connections another motivation that he identified was that you could avoid the use of the external external solder connections on the outside of the device that there'd be some benefit to avoiding that and we saw evidence of that in the background the admitted background section of the patent at column three around line forty where it says the same thing that it's known in the art that the external solder connections are problematic and things you'd like to avoid and so that was another motivation that our expert relied on and by the way the board cited that motivation x twenty seven i'm sorry i cited the background section of the pa x twenty seven and then finally your honor we would just argue that under here some of this is just substituting one known element for another where the function or the performance of it is not unexpected is the performance wors x he was approached by somebody that had done exactly this they had gotten rid of their extra can actually do so around plan and they said hey mr prime at work you know we want to know how much is this the performance of this device going to do great they came to him to ask him that are also having personal recollection of a prior art device that removed the ground the edge ground and used the pen so such devices were known they weren't common at the time they were prevalent that it wasn't the preferred way but they were up and speak for themselves but our understanding all along i think the board's understanding is that they were preaching that has had to be interpreted as including them both together the pin going to the ground on the edge connection going to ground to some extent the issue is moot and we should prevail under either construction although we feel very strongly that our interpretation of hazard and the boys interpretation was the correct one i'm gone i'm on the can see the rest of my time unless there are some issues that were raised in the briefing that you have questions about i read thank you