her legal career and i wish her well so i mean the admission of kristen cobb who is a member of the bar and is in good standing with the highest courts are virginia and the district of columbia have knowledge of the gentlest and i'm satisfied that she possesses the necessary very good i also know about this card credentials and i'm very confident she's going to be an excellent member of our bar and i wish judge who's the best without miss carr but he's going to need it the motion is conclude that there's just we don't have a clear and definite conviction that the drug below misread the cutter references and in fact we defer to her finding that the cutter references do in fact teach applying to the court so concluded the court would respect clearly very in the same way that the judge did for this race ok but if we disagree with you on that then of course then carter does teach in suggest you're right that's your view of where the data came from i understand but now can you explain to me where in the literature that you mention is there a report that the x and the does it it has a statement in the text that it is high in genital areas and structure that comes into being at puberty and the second there is six characteristic areas and which is responsible for producing the sense of time and it is for that reason that there was  male and female and all kinds of s not the way these things are written and nobody thinks that's what it means that rick it's required to have an element of common sense in realizing for example to use the trivial example you're obviously condemning it's not broadly encompassed but the disclosure is a blunderbuss and the trial judge pointed to a series of claims thinking that they taught that they don't you look at those there are two kinds of claims there are claims need to avoid transference was in the literature since nine hundred eighty six we pointed that out in our papers and their diet star case they cite says the desire the only commercial benefit from improving the product is universal even though not even and where does that leave  those were with females right those were none of them were with males i don't recall the glance ok i'll recall for you it's with females that has a very peculiar there isn't no not at all because you can determine whether there's a d h t in the absence of something that answered that concern the trial judge even found it was a concern thank you ever exact language of particular concern the potential for increasing is that right ok two way argument in the context of secondary considerations rather then and what i understand to be the more customary way which is and in the motivation to comp fifty pages detail factual findings it collectively considered all for all the evidence of all four gram factors it collectively considered them i think it any age forty to ninety three they considered all the evidence collectively  any of this obviousness analysis therefore by definition it took into consideration the teaching away references before concluding anything about motivation or secondary considerations now they just basically addressed color now the the expert replied and that's exactly the court found that credible but surely credible for multiple reasons because she looked at the two thousand and two thousand and one and read exactly what they said now cover two thousand this is appendix to issue one five five again but what he says is however this is appendix two to seven thousand eight second column under discussion however in addition to complexity of the skins constituents different experimental conditions using the studies which may possibly h alpha activity but then even if it is cautionary statement that you should not not compare these components of skin from different regional or an atomic regions of the body and so the only testimony this r lots of double wall structure shows are we talking about walls to a one to a four to or want to go for exactly i didn't see your side raising this particular theory below it was released and  theory i saw below supported by doctors thing was the theory of removing the annular rid tool for and then just relying exclusively on peripheral wall to lawn that wasn't an alternative theory and has little game just what was or is an alternative to for the sake of argument i assume right now that i only saw one theory presented below and also assume that your now exclusive theory that you're raising to me i believe is a brand new theory that wasn't raised below anywhere where where would i find it in a few different spaces most importantly a one to nine of the district court's express fin it in testimony in the context of addressing lots of different limitations identified right where where did  up fifty seven i'm fifteen e two hundred twenty one ninety four ninety five and twenty seventy one seventy two ok so if i don't find it there then it as being part of the double wall structure it's also it's a well for the findings of all points of court to practice its six eight five seven and also the scrollable was not a favorite place it was off limits after two thousand and two you can see the products that were there all went somewhere rights are shoulder stomach of the case is not submitted yet to hear one more minute make good use of it we also affirmed the finding that you failed to prove that the patent is invalid then you still have the view that the case needs to go back to address to combine issues and the other issues with respect to one twenty one hundred descriptions the size if i could that which was based on a contingency as i understand it from the briefing that that the court accepted a certain john very good thank you very much your honor the case is now submitted