board does have some intuitive appeal that you maintain a friendship that doesn't mean you see someone every single day you can maintain it over a period of time with periodic contact what's your response to that yeah but reception of the signal there and interment synchronization means there's no synchronization going on between it has no relation between the instances of synchronization that may occur in their ports not maintain it's not kept and it could and it just makes then your car that doesn't mean you're working right away they've maintained information between each other and that has to be kept an existing state it can't be intermittent such that there is no connection so that's that's part of my problem where your spec do you believe is the best for for the fact that maintained means  again the spec discussed discusses using a timing reference signal continuously to maintain a connection between two transceivers but we also relied on the dictionary definition of maintaining an expert testimony and all those things taken together are what support our seconds from one frame counter to any one transceiver to a frame counter in a nd transceiver such that they are synchronized with each other in a synchronization is maintained and it's not intermittent synchronization that's occurring with the frame transmissions so we believe that's that's consistent with our understanding what maintaining synchronization means that it's keeping this existing state of synchronization during the low power mode and does not encompass bursts of data that might have individual unique synchronization that are unrelated to each other so we have to find that and that the claim construction is wrong before we can agree with you right that's with us to find that they are does not teach limitation correct ok synchronization is not limited to any particular type of synchronization includes timing and for any synchronization you are correct yes and do certain intermittent character to at least frame synchronization well you know because again it's sent at regular periods and each side knows what's going on on the other side they count the frame as i received it so they are maintaining synchronization because it's at regular periods continuously again as opposed to intermittent bursts of data that may include synchronization bits that are unique to that data packet unrelated to previous or subsequent receipts and other data packets that might have secret ization information ok so moving along so under this construction the teaching of the early reference which  intermittently or in verse between transceivers and synchronization information from the data packets are unique to the data packets such that when a data packet is received the synchronization that occurs is unrelated to synchronization that may occur on the receipt of other data packets therefore in the early system synchronization is not maintained but because there is no synchronization between receipt of different packets and again the packets could come at random times therefore the teaches only intermittent synchronization is only relevant if we find that maintaining synchronization doesn't cover that right if it doesn't cover intermittent synchronization right lastly respect of the dish i p r the board's finding was bas via a periodic super frame synchronization as purportedly disclosed by the combination of those references but vicious petition never argued or provide any evidence that claims to and twelve are taught by periodic super frame synchronization that phrase doesn't appear in their papers the board's finding therefore is unsupported by any evidence or argument in the record and therefore violated g q delta's due process rights fight coming up with this finding in its final written a citizen indeed t v delta didn't have notice of this and and i don't see how you can say you weren't i don't notice that argument but for the purposes of maintaining synchronization they relied on the synchronizing bits of morelli and made no reference to super frame synchronization in that mayor to be found in the other references in fact the only thing they relied on for the standard was to teach i believe the ability to send internet or video data with respect to claim one it never was relied on their spec to claim to  there was never any dispute that this was relying on them really referencing the synchronizing bits to teach the limitation maintaining synchronization they never said that at the world argument or in the reply they were they were switching or the basis for what teaches the describes this frame synchronization and in particular talks about data frames that are being transmitted followed by a nd ization frame correct so the synchronization frame is not continuously court the st thing i'd like to address is the fact that we just heard that intermittent had to be related and that's nowhere in the specification or described anywhere in the intrinsic record whatsoever instead the board's claim construction was correct the board's claim construction said that maintaining synchronization did not exclude periodic or intermittent and it did so because the specification as runners of already pointed out specifically calls to synchronizing the frames by sending a sync signal at the end of a super frame so you get sixty eight frames and then the last train sixty ni is a super frame then it starts over again and the next sixty nine is a separate super frame so i don't understand the argument that they have to be related to each other because super frame number one has one sync signal super frame number two has another what it does is a super frame includes the sixty eight dollars frames plus the sixty nine dollars which is the synchronizing frame that's to make sure that sixty eight dollars have gone by where you're not necessarily synchronized and in the th you say hey maybe we need to synchronize again so it's not continuous for those sixty eight just like any other intermittent type of signal where you send a signal and say make sure that we're caught up to where we were before that's exactly how the super frames operate and to say now that maintaining has to be continuous and not intermittent would read out the preferred embodiment of the super frame structure which only uses the th frame to cause the synchronization and so the definition that the board gave was absolutely correct and its application of our art to that definition is supported by substantial evidence and in fact that john is also pointed out not refuted if it's the correct construction there is no rebuttal that there would be obviousness based on the rest the exact combination of mirali bowie and the answer standards even if you were to find that construction somehow excluded intermittent there's nothing in morality that says that it's intermittent and in fact what we heard was so long as the synchronization is maintained it doesn't matter if the trans middle of that bit is intermittent and that's exactly what our expert testified they only quote the st sentence when they say that our expert agreed that the sacred ization is intermittent if you look to page optics for seven hundred and fifty six he's asked is the signal a continuous or near intermittent he says it's intermittent he then is asked is it your understanding that synchronization is intermittent he says correct for the very next question he's asked will then how does that meet the claim and the axe clarifies you asked me if the data transmission was going or meant not the synchronization the synchronization is continuous during all periods of transmission the fact that the transmission itself is intermittent is not relevant to that argument so even if your hon instruction the combination still meets it what's your response to your friend's argument that you never really did rely on systems now your honor we absolutely did rely on the answer standards and we did rely on that imitation in fact one of the most important things if you look in the appendix it for fifty four in our reply brief below we specifically said that we reiterated that we only rely on morality for its shen rural teaching that  maintain synchronization while in low power mode that same page and this is argued in the read briefing page twenty nine dollars that same page of the appendix for fifty four dollars confirms that the combination could receive any data with sync information therefore has to match up to the answer standards ansi says when you're sending a video you use frames for synchronization and we actually cite the fact that the combination could either attempt to bottling corporate  transceiver on and allow boeing to continue receiving the frames that it previously received and that's in the appendix papers two hundred and thirty two and two hundred and thirty three which also cites and seventy eight citing page two hundred and forty in the kitchen that says we want to make sure that we can continue receiving these frames i wish i did have any other questions i'm not transceivers to communicate one transmits the other receives it's a lie directional communication link and so the opposite direction is also possible and is the figure shows there can be a modem that has its receiver on and it its transmitters on and this situation combined with the amount of teaching is what renders obvious claim to i just want to make sure that's go back to the basics and your concession did not killers of maintaining synchronization to the maintaining synchronization limitation of claim to but claim to is reference to you know doing this while in the low power mode the low power mode was taught by the combination of which was part of the analysis a plain one mano teaches that the transmit and receive circuitry can operate independently which results in lower power consumption when the modem is not transmitting data and  appeal so i guess i'm confused so you're saying you're a light on the combination for a different claim and that we're supposed to assume that the combination is still relevant to what's at issue here the combination is still relevant here questions i'll see the rest of our time synchronization it's not really the correct analogy of the correct analogy would be more like it's analogous to meeting a st person and then maybe later meeting a different person who has no relationship to the st person i think that would be a more apt analogy relevant to the arguments that they're making with respect to claim to lie when to incorporate their arguments as a claim line into the claim to analysis right so the problem is they repeatedly refer to the immodest teaching of the receiver language you claim to is being met by the teaching of your mano a receiver being in a low power mold where the pole is used and it creates another issue the whole point of the periodic hole in your motto is that it's used to coordinate with a far end transceiver when wake up the receiver in the amount of ice that's in the low power mode to a full power mode to start receiving data so in other words you wouldn't use the periodic pole with a receiver that's already in a full power mode the whole point of the poll is to tell that receiver when to wake up and go into a full power meter your mind was to teach the synchronization right yes in order to coordinate when the receiver should wake up out of the low power mode and the claim requires that the receiver be in a full power mode of receiving data