need joint and is designed so that it can take into account the fragile frayed degraded diseased cartilage so our it's not your fault that you are really close in your eye if you can vary wildly i apologize  honor i've been accused of that more than once and i should have learned by now sits on top of the knee and preserves the cartilage while at the same time providing a firm fixation so that when you drill your drill in the right place when you saw off a piece of bone you saw on the right place in the patterns teach how to do this it teaches how to assess the defects how to image model select the proper materials and most importantly shape and size the temporary device it sits on top of the cartilage in the bone and provides that stable platform we're talking about the primary reference here is similar in that it's designed to provide a temporary drill guy but it rests on bone it rests on bone and there was no mention of cartilage in the patent there's no mention of cartilage anywhere in the history and perhaps more importantly all those teachings i mentioned that the pattern fit issues tell you how you can incorporate and rely upon the cartilage for that negative image to sit there properly none of now in the end yes and no your honor and i say the no part because if you read the p tabs opinion it really reads like a single reference obviousness case what fell an alexander ad i'm not rest on and preserve the cartilage in a stable and secure way having rejected that ground it's then turned around and looked at alexander and fell and i'm speculating wildly here on for that i apologize but said what i felt when alexander don't add anything alexander and of course we've argued waver in our brief for the obvious reason that it's not mentioned in in the p tabs response of grief here but alexander just teaches m r i techniques that were known that don't have anything to do with creating a mirror image not to reflect not the image that defective areas but to bridge them to go over them in the way that it is a pothole in the street you can either repair it or you control big metal plate over it our patents are talking about engaging the whole changed and it is really loud but the board did sign that rather much or i teach is a surgical tool that mates with the need joint which naturally includes cartlidge and they said that because this includes operational quote and natural not pretreated surface of the i see those structure that is with out removing the cartilage so that it is in fact teaching you some cartilage even though it may never mention the word currently on the records one of skill in the art would understand that it mates with a knee joint in its natural state which includes cartilage so that was there as i understand their fact finding marker doesn't teach doesn't say anything about is that the device you're creating the claim device reflects that cartilage incorporates that cartilage in some way it mirrors that cartilage that's why of the cartilage but rather micro doesn't just doing anything with it it doesn't suggest that you take the information you may have about cartilage that may be there likely is there and then therefore create the image that is the heart of the clay the claim is about the word imaging kept appearing in the quote you read your honor and that's exactly my point that's exactly the error the quote you just summarizes where we think that peter when iraq the issue was not whether ratta mocker images ketches in its cartilage of course it goes the question is not whether alexander images m r i cartilage of course it does the question anybody imaging the need for any purpose is going to see the cartilage the claim is not about imaging claim is about what you do with the image the claim is that having the image of cartilage include cartilage information right but then does your template reflect the image you captured is is your template of the bone or is your template reproduce and then segments of able to fix it so it tells you precisely what the mold is off the mold is of bone surface not of cartilage that may or may not be there so this is not merely the the p tap inferring something from an absence this is a pita inferring something that is directly contradicted by the reference itself the reference tells us the moment that what you're reproducing is the bone surface not cartilage and that's not surprising because it doesn't teach you all the things that our parents teach you about how you deal with a fundamentally different material disease cartilage which is inherently less stable apparently less predictable inherently less of us of a foundation than bones so your honor you're right we have a substantial evidence standard and that is a hurdle that we have to overcome but when the reference itself says bone boem boem boem boem you don't get to then say but we infer that you really meant cartilage when you're talking about what you're building not what you're seen not required that if you're combining references you have a reasonable expectation success there was literally eighty eight words in the record that goes to this point the descent properly founded conclusory type i don't believe there is any evidence substantial or otherwise upon which the people have could have found a reasonable expectation of success thank you that right i mean it's a little odd i think that's i think that's right i think that rather markers doesn't mention cartilage as conformists points out explicitly and so so it was sort of well it sort of discloses this because the joint naturally includes cartilage but even if you didn't have that you have a nd reference that shows matching cartilage the court doesn't have any other questions i'm happy t focus with my brief time remaining on the reasonable expectation of success everything counsel just cited as the evidence and there's no doubt that on the motivation to combine the kitab talks at length about the motivation of combining we have an reasonable expectation of success so i mean this is difficult for us and we did go back to the briefs and i don't i mean obviously what matters it is what arguments you made in a recent poll expectation of success and what the board adequately address those arguments so imaged device the mirror image of the bone and stick it on uncertain unstable crab like this of maryland or that runs me on some level but  sits on top of the bone cartilage that is an unstable platform so that was dr clark's explanation for why you would not have a reasonable expectation of success that's i mean it's it's kind of common sense but that's what he laid out