good afternoon everyone we have the five cases on the docket today however two of those cases are being submitted on the briefs without or would just for the record note those two cases the first one is number zero seven dash three zero two one williams versus the american systems protection board and the second one is numbers zero seven dash three one one zero raymond versus office of personnel management again those two cases are being submitted on the briefs without oral argument the first case in which we will hear oral argument this morning and sept an inexcusable is number zero six dash one three zero five e m c electronics versus mitsubishi question the question is if the district court is to use his discretion her discretion in excluding this test in order for the testimony for that reason the use of discretion there has to testimony as you can we is there a place in the record where we can see that it was brought to the district court's attention josie we have in this case what was this gentleman's name you and i've had problems pronouncing it both in and out of court which is your son ok mr mills starting for purposes of this question of whether or not his testimony was  incorrectly excluded what are the we have in here an expert report and then there's i think six separate declarations what are the critical documents in terms of the and you said you rely on a second declaration and what else do you rely on that you say supports the proposition that he should have been allowed to state in other words if he gets over the  also but i'm having a problem with the enablement issue can i ask you a question that yes the trial judge correctly references in yes and the trial judge dealt with that on summary judgment but my question to you is what happened to the  reasonable jury could find the facts other than the way she found i thought there was a request for a jury trial wasn't there there was in the written aren't they entitled to a  i would not reach a g and the answer is yes she clearly made a mistake but your answer is it's not relevant to the outcome and it's the now go back to my question related how could she decide all these factual issues and never say no reasonable jury could have come out this way and there from giving summary judgment because all those facts are alicia's as to whether under experimentation were required or what to do this in a way to get below one thousand effects what the rest of that you say your experts say now it can't be done there experts say oh yes all you have to do is tweak the hot zone and have a little of this a little in ulation and do a few things and it'll diary from from manufacturer to manufacturer depending time how they did they have all that in there and i can't find perhaps i missed it can you help me find in situation like we have here where we tested they relied on only the all so the judge accurately correctly found even if she didn't use precise words sh thinking genuine issues of fact but those precise words are critical to her ability to give summary judgment she has got the power that she had sufficient grounds that i don't have to go to about a process but talks a lot about the development of a hot cell and then also the and to what your guidance of running the decorations may very well win i don't know on a trial but i don't see how anybody mr rader had six extra minutes ok so that takes him up to twenty one minutes right ok you had you went over by about two minutes into your four what we discussed that was the joint appendix thirteen thousand and nine twenty eight  see i understand but but he said that he had to make these multiple paths and my understanding of what the district court said was that the multiple paths approach was not shown to be reliable and used in the industry right standard methodology for getting that around to tend to the third he said measured he explains it by saying well if i look at three slices i go from thirty three that thirty three hundred to something like eleven hundred which is substantially the same as that right the reality that i said if you just i can't make sense out of that it makes no sense to me to say dodgy lead q tip thirty three hundred as the closest level you can depict but if you look at three pieces of thirty three hundred suddenly you're seeing eleven heard it