the first case for argument this morning is sixteen one nine one three other decks north america versus mitchell international mr york's whenever you're ready claims are directed to like this isn't getting information for ordering groceries or something like that this is information about the value of a vehicle or information about replacement parts the cost of certain replacement parts for a vehicle so it's the character of that information that all the sudden creates an inventive concept when you use with established s p technology is that your argument yeah it is because there is the dozens of one on one cases and it's not clear to me why the character of the information of the data that's getting transmitted from node eight a node b of a sudden is enough to be considered inventive concept when we're in thematically seem to be more focused on how have you improved a computer or a computer network as a tool rather than using a computer as a tool to you know send data data collect retrieve data what regardless of what that data may be well i think the these systems are quite and neither they've  by but you don't claim any complex algorithms to create the databases you simply say there's pages with data and then we can put them together using this a f p technology right yeah what i'm trying to describe additional information that informed someone about more aspects of the value of the transaction rather than just where the two come out and matching them up would that have changed kauri now i understand that there is this issue about where the burden should have been placed if in fact they are court were to change the placement of the burden isn't it  some difficult underlying factual questions and in reaching the want to one question of what is the abstract idea for your proposed amended claims or and assuming there is it is focused on directed to an abstract idea of whether there's an incentive concept here i understand you're saying nobody it used is p technology before to retrieve this particular kind of data but in the end if we were to conclude on a dyno vote review that there's this is not an invented concept and i want to make clear that it doesn't appear that who has the assignment of the burden of proof on a motion of men seems to make sense basically said they didn't see anything in the in the amendments that moved them off of their original claim about the original patent claims yet they cited the independent play which added the language about yes could you give me a better explanation of what is it about the fact that your claim is discussing the use of an active service server page to go get this data as opposed to say if you were just looking at a big book that had a valuation of each car for every make model year having it in a database and then accessing the database through an active server case changes where the urge of persuasion is applied then here i think you can still get firm for all the reasons you've said it and probably more i would suggest that the burden persuasion the allocation of that before the patch on appeals or did not affect that then trial appeals court decision as you noted there were factual findings that were supported by the record and then the legal conclusions based upon those were not founded on the earlier persuasion they were founded on the facts of the decisions that they came to as you  and little three so i don't believe that even if you find the misapplication of persuasion that you need to read than for any further consideration could you go to the actual content of proposed claims thirty seven and forty with the other side believes that there is an inventive concept there and using any one active service page to go get the valuation and report data from one database and then a second active server page to go to a second database to go get the cost estimate for how much it would cost to repair a car and combining those two things and drawing different access to different information so when i opened a webpage instead of having a static h t m l page which everyone of us would see the same page if we opened it we then may see something different or some different content and i think this is kind of what folks use section one i guess the other side's we're torte would be well they're using this as p technology to draw from two separate databases using two seven pretty active server pages and so somehow the combination of all of that is unconventional arrangement of technology and i would have to disagree with that because again we know he s p exists it was created by microsoft for the specific purpose of calling data from a database and the fact that you're using two control over the information that's in but about the hero so if they want to get the value of the damage you can put damage and you can see the bombers and damage and scratched if you want to value the vehicle without the damage you simply do not with the damage it  every instance for arrival is no damage but actually see it says no damage so if you put the main mother here and other distinguishing information about the vehicle then and you do not do any adjustments you are actually going to get a value that vehicle without any damage to any  created this product was to try to figure out the estimate of the value of the car after it's been damaged rommel's doesn't actually say me thing about let's try to figure out what the value of the car before it other vehicle that's been an accident for example everything that i've told you right now if you go through and jerry made model year engine size and things like that if you do nothing else the default value going to get back is the value of the vehicle without any damage to any you have to actually go through and change it so i think if you just look at that on its face it tells you that you can get various types of balance or be able including post accident damage value in a preemptive damage field so i would disagree  directed to providing the evaluations that include damage estimates quote so someone would have been motivated to use a s p technology because it was really one of the only available technologies that dynamically process content from web pages right and his answer was right and add to that that in the corporate environment microsoft was very strong so people were often in the corporate environment posting on microsoft's servers with ins so you got all the texas experts say yes yes he was a well known technology ok thank you