narrow the meaning of that particular claim term and instead they claim term itself and its own meaning was more important than what the i think they demonstrated that clean terms can control but even there what happened in both of those cases is the court to look to the specification now to mention here is the contradiction then determine what the meaning was who has to hack it seems to me that the construction that you're advocating here is is difficult to square with the surrounding language in the play minutes hard for me to understand if that's the construction of what what does within said system interface mean that  case you would like to have rather than the case because the language is hard to avoid it's in no doubt what was written was not what was intended because it just doesn't it doesn't really make a lot of sense and it certainly conflicts with the specification but it says what it says well your honor conflicts with the specification if you do what the district court did which was put the emphasis on the pen is it does locate within the schematic the script processor as being connected with the data export and import data interface yes so the script process is the only interface it's connected to that it is imported data from a interface and the export data interface it's not connected to the management user interface my butt but it's clear that the information that tells  when we see it occurs within the system's interface we're talking about items thirty two and thirty four of figure two which is the important data interface where we argue below your apps are alternative position direction as just let a minute ago but if the script processor doesn't reside in the in the system's interface and the data transformation doesn't occur in the system interface what happens what is the systems interface doing the systems interface is the way the user or a specific computer puts the information into the script processor and tells it how to do things that is that's the input where somebody said this is how we want you to transform this particular information this is how to do whether that interface is supposed to define the scr right but the scripts are simply software that tells you how to do it and i'm having trouble seeing how you're using the limitations of the claim limitation one see right then yes you want to say somehow that this within systems interface is defining the scripts which is that's what the data transformation is within the system's interface opponents say you should use the left in the season rule and therefore since the words that are closest to the data transformation are with insead systems interface then it means the data transformation control of the data transformation but it's the information that you within said system and systems interface be put the information in through the system interface that sets the control that is how the script processor operat been how do you read this phrase then to to control data transformation within said system interface so how would you have us read that to control with in if you look at your graph if you look at it one way that's a rabbit you look at the other places because this is really that easy to find a problem if you look at it one way and you start out thinking this is about data transformation within the systems you address briefly the conflicts problem sort of taken gun represents the client you are representing today and did you were at one time also retention agreement the earlier retention agreement was not before him and he didn't rule on it but that's an issue that wasn't decided that would be decided in the in the north carolina precisely but not of the case goes back  admittedly somewhat and i characterize it it's an offshoot of our jurisprudence that says you know the specification can be more important than the claims in some instances the claims can be brought and we're going to bring all the specifics into the into the into those claims why would we do argument and the court has said no in this case we're going to use the specification to override what appears to be a meaning  baffles there was no ambiguity in the single word bastard was you were there was only question as to what it means that's where we're at right here that's where we are here let me i wouldn't say it's the trunk of the tree but it says there's a branch off there that you know that says even when there's no ambiguity and we're going to use the specification as the preeminent source of meaning for the invention of the claims i think it's very hard for chief judge breyer to reconcile if if if you read those decisions and acknowledge that branch why isn't this one of those branch scales i'll answer that because i think that even in those branches cases cheap or free even in what you've described as those grants cases you still ability argument he says look at control to pass the data transformation or second to say i have to control it's in the systems interface and the data transformation well it's happening but it's the control that's what it is and let me show you again why that won't work look let's look at the language of claim limitations see it so to control and then we have the language that my friend has put it i read that second clause and saying to control don't know what was in the inventors and their attorneys has when they wrote this claim but if you look at the specification it talks about transformation with the system now within the systems of this but then you see the term systems interface and distribution system using the same claims they clearly must mean different things since the different terms were utilized there and even more importantly in claim for teaching which has now been canceled after reexamination you claim language in the preamble that said specification doesn't support control within the systems interface it just does so let me say it is hard to the plain plain language the structure of that is very clear i think everyone in the north term pending north carolina actually why is there a risk if this is agreements were not considered and there's no doubt that well i think the ultimately as quickly as we understand that the decision of north carolina court would have to make interests at the time because of the foundational aspect of the work and thirdly that the compensation arrangement that was entered into was entered into without regard to the the representation of staff sufficient for the court simply to look at it and say i see the language it's clear that it's the signal that's the issue and the better view is that the court should go to me look at everything in this available to make sense of the language and if that's what thank you our next case