importantly too are you that you can see that's announced that we just said yes but more importantly to us is the principle that even analogous art you have to look at the full teachings or you can discourage the combination even when the knowledge  dennison were wireless communication that is infrared and notes that it improves the security of the system because they're worried about exposure in the  sing that secured so if one of the skill is going to look at that you would not say well i'm going to disregard the teachings about security and incorporate a they could i wired connection apart because and that are not of the armed with a lock shield a lock versus security device in a retail store that is alarmed that teaches this focuses on a simple system self contained avoiding extraneous proponents and we think when you look at the two you know there are problems with this combination proposer the other problem we have a combination of shock occlusion a lot of the opinions of war and a lot and some of the for example the argument that you know wired to wireless communication was well known and easy to do is simply saying it's the well one of scale there could have done this not would have done this given the you can reprogram them there's all these advantages this did for example on page eighty one fifty two of the appendix why isn't that enough for providing motivation to combine or modify  fact it's set up to handle but the keys in the locker set up to handle multiple codes to same time and on the other flip side of the situation doesn't express a concern about the security of do not remember the board finding it teaches reactivation there with respect to claim thirty  you thirty five of the eight hundred  respect to the rock and then this in combination are all issues of fact motivation to combine expectation of success and what the references teach and so this and that substantial evidence supports the board's factual findings so dennison and ron paul are both directed to security devices for protecting our retail merchandise from fast denison mechanical keys council for interview educated that that the primary limitation of venison is is a wireless key its primary purpose not a wireless key it's an electronic key as opposed to a mechanical key and it explains the advantages of keys that can be lost and stolen i think we understand ok so but are you ok then i'll move on so the board correctly found then that there was a motivation to combine also the board correctly found that there was an expectation question in particular but the question the question was do you concede as to genesis in that reprogramming it's the same thing yeah i would say reprogramming is the same as started your opposing counsel reprogramming refresher use the same thing is react i would say reprogramming refreshing would reprogramming refreshing would right so then and then with respect to claim twenty though you claim twenty does not does not even require reactivation or or refreshed let's assume we don't leave with ok then and then at the dentist and settings on the on the key you know to accommodate different work schedules and stuff like that they can be taken back to the programming station and reprogrammed refresh reactivated at that time so  if that reprogramming refreshing doesn't occur again he determined and that's precisely what happens because as dennison discloses it can be programmed initially for different work schedules so if if nothing is done to the key the key it will timeout and stop operating after a period of time that is precisely what dennison disclose and if the key then if the work schedule is change you could be correctly construed a single security code as one security code it rejected in views argument of it that the term imposes incapability on the programming station context of the claims claim thirty five of the eight hundred patent does not even require a code to be generated by the programmer station at all  code isn't even mentioned with in the context of the programming station so if it's would it would not make sense to construe claim thirty five as requiring a limitation or actually an incapability on the programming station and in fact no claim of the eight hundred patent recites and incapability of the program in some of the in other independent claims do as well but but the point is since since it's not so it's not a limitation that's in claim was it would not make sense to be applying for a restriction on the programming station concerning an inability of the programming station with respect to the security code i understand what you're saying i think what you're saying is that  construed the term single security code to mean line security code and there was no reason to read an anything about the programming station with respect that correct ok but then with respect to raw qualms the notion that raw form part of the self contained system the modified wroclaw system would still be self contained because the self contained system is the is the same components it's going to be the it's going to be the it that the alarm mechanism with all the different sensors that hasn't been modified with respect to iraq on what's been replaced is a an electronic key as opposed to a mechanical k and yes an electronic key will not be integrated but neither was a mechanical key mechanical key was never integrated so when we look at the also rock on never mentions any preference for mechanical k and certainly not a preference for a mechanical feel for the electronic a because it doesn't even mention electronic key none of the issues with respect to  yeah but i don't think that equates to the dennis in teaching of of reactivating or the q operational limits means that is refreshing and reprogramming as described in our path and that's where i