two o eight in like rabbits a modification of a primary reference to up on which is an oil cup by a check valve lubricating not all of fish it's essential that these fluids in most cases are toxic gases they should not excuse the valve stem out into the atmosphere therefore it's necessary that a lubricant which is in the form of a in comparison the primary reference to upham is a nine hundred thirty eight oil cut that was mounted on an engine block to deliver oil by gravity flow had to be provided periodically and in a large flow to flow through the barrier the problem was how to deliver the oil periodically and how do you flush the  not anything similar in construction or function to the well cup of upham up and is not analogous it's not analogous because it's just because it was directed to lubrication it was not considered to be in the same field of endeavor therefore we contend that the oil cup of upham is not in the same field of endeavor and it is  qualified as a primary reference in the combination with the secondary reference fisher also a very important point the combination of references  and fisher do not disclose or suggest the elements of our claims principally three elements are not disclosed by this combination the first element is the connection of the fitting to a connected to a member that extends from the valve up and has a lower end portion that's threaded that screws into the bearing it sits on top of the bearing there's no element extending from the bearing to connect to the up on cup well cup that's one principal difference yet another the difference says the connection of the butt head fitting the devices that are shown are spring and ball sprinkler balls these are not checkouts they don't maintain pressure they don't prevent backflow they're what we term as  necessary it can be omitted if a check felt was required to control the flow of fluid into a device under pressure and prevent backflow it has to be clearly so that state it and the prior art references that we cited show that there no disclosure at all in the fisher reference that that spring and ball is required to maintain pressure on the system or to print back low and if a spring and ball can be omitted it's connected or part of the lubricating nipple twelve up but that spring in ball is nothing more than a breather or a dust cover and the significance of the spring and ball in murphy libertarian device is a quick connection of the lubricating gun to the nipple and in fact that's such an important feature it's defined and claims two and three and up and the feature that it's not on the spring and ball so those elements all those elements are absent from the upper reference in combination with pressure but most importantly in this case the teaching of upham to include a check valve is against the teaching there's there is absolutely no condition under which the  oil cup can operate with a check out because it's based on gravitational flow rate or carefully read the reference substantial evidence that the flow of lubricant through the oil cup  cup and then the oil is flushed through the bearing to clear it out lubricating gun is removed pressure as relief this is this is a disclosure and would we affirm this case no because while because the check found cannot work at the lubricating nipple up and we prove that and i plea i'm sorry part of my hypothetical question  the courts finding that it's not persuasive so i'm basically taking away from because the principle of operation up of its gravitational flow of oil from the oil to the bearings that is the principle of operation you put a check found at the end  and you don't have the necessary prerequisites for flow gravitational flow of oil from the oil cup is determined by the atmospheric pressure of the inlet atmospheric pressure and they claim a fitting assembly to lubricate and feel about and the elements of this claims again are very broad we just seen a basin opening a vertical member and a second opening at the top of the vertical member and the button head fitting there is no there is nothing in the claims about the interior of the chamber being under pressure there is nothing about that the only discussion of the design of the button had fitting with a check valve is this idea that it's a spring let it ball and incorporated or said that up on was adapted to operate with murphy which showed the spring loaded ball if for some reason the court felt that that was not enough examiner came back and said that we can also look to fisher fisher as a similar lubricating fitting apparatus and fisher shows the ball and i can be combined with to teach all the elements of the claim that's not claimed and even some of the evidence that was cited by kravitz and mr adams does not suggest that a check valve has to maintain the chamber under pressure and there are more fraying and class pack which is cited by mr kravitz that talks about preventing back flow it doesn't talk about the chamber being under pressure showing weiss just as mr adams said talks about sealing with the lubricating portion and the plug it doesn't talk about the chamber being under pressure so for those reasons if you look to the actual language of the claims and you don't import it limitations from the specifications or import limitations that are not even in th important point is that there is no basis for the examiner's conclusion that it's necessary for the checkout upham to prevent backflow or to maintain the system under atmospheric pressure coming up from the outlet overcomes the weight of the fluid in the vessel the gravitational force of the fluid in the vessel is past kills l its density times height has nothing to do with the volume we've been taken to task by the patent office that the device that we created to show the operation was not the right size it was it was too large volume has nothing to do with the equation that the indolent pressure atmosphere is balanced by the outlet pressure atmospheric the result pressures the gravitational flow that's