the requirements for something to be a high pass filter and notwithstanding a seemingly agreed set of words to describe that operation the the board and phillips have a   there really is no dispute about the accused system this is not a case where a fact finder is asked to figure out you know how exactly do we meet some of the board considered a high pass filter as a device or program sequence that transmits frequencies above a given cutoff frequency and substantially attenuates all others i happen to have once been an electrical engineer that seems like a very reasonable and sound definition to me if you said your problem is one of claim construction what is your problem with that defines the filter and insisted that in order to qualify as a high pass filter a filter needs to work outside of the context of the the prior art system every single input that the filtering tucker is in the forty eight dollars band gets wiped out by the low pass filter and processor twenty six dollars of tucker is that right internally for the filter that's right but what comes out of the filter is the desired forty eight sec what i guess as i understood the board's decision the board was concerned that the high band components are not being preserved through the processor twenty six with the low band components are being preserved and ultimately getting reflected up into the higher than right and then you know that or is that an accurate understanding of what's going on in factor i think that's an accurate understanding with the with the important addition that by the way tucker is designed the low band and the high band components are identical and the the nub of this dispute is whether in order to meet the definition of high pass filter transmit coming are the frequency components in the low band they're getting transferred in the hybrid stand but the content of the low band is what's called to be preserved and being put it by processor twenty six that correct it no it isn't because the low band signal is not being output by processor twenty six that's that's the key point here the b processor twenty six after the ups well it's getting reflected the content of the low band is getting reflected into the high band is that right that is how the prop the processor works in turn it right that's correct so that then what is being output it is whatever the content was  being i'll put it in the high band but it that it comes from the low back i don't write well i just i'm trying to understand how it works and if you want to characterize it however you want to characterize it that's fine but i just want to make sure i understand internal operations show of processor twenty six and tuckered certainly the internal operations are probably did i say that was wrong about the internal operations of talker you didn't say anything that was wrong ok the the one thing though that's important me to understand is that mathematically the low band and the high band at the input point to the filter are absolutely identical so there's no way looking at the output to see is that was this the content of the low band or was this the content of the high bad it's exactly the same what you have is a filter that takes following the upsampling step and input signal that span eight killer hertz it so happens that for every input no matter what your voice signal is the zero to four hundred and forty eight will be mirror images of one another and what comes out is attenuated from zero to four and present from four to eight and that by definition is a high pass filter it is transmitted by high frequency signal and it is attenuated to the low frequency signal that means the literal wording of the claim construction do you have any understanding of reflecting the content of the low pass filter into the high band when i agree with you the result is the same but it's just seems like so much bigger of a waste of time devices to do it that way so that the record doesn't reflect  wipers designed that way and the only thing i can point to is that clocks thirty two consist of an up sample followed by a low pass filter because in the in the when reconstructing the low band signal you want to be in the lower band and it may well be that there was some ability to reuse code or  transmit in this art is just sending it's all focused on not on what happens inside the box not on whether anything is passed through without modification internally but but to find it based on  transmitter and receiver system transmit in the claims themselves does not mean take a signal and don't do anything to it at all internally and emitted again it is focused on what is the output what is what definition a device for programing sequence that transmits frequencies above a given cutoff frequency and substantially attenuates all others that's why we see this as meeting claim construction with the the four corners of have it was  articulated but apparently there was a lurking dispute that those those words didn't resolve in the board imported this additional requirement that this filter if you gave it some signal that wasn't their image would still function and there's no basis for that because it never received such a signal this is a you know this is a single reference anticipation case there is no question of whether this filter could be combined with some other component and still work the same way it is a  filter that always receives the high frequency signal in both the upper and lower band and the goal is to put it only in the high band so that you have a nice clean essential a blank slate in the four quarters range that you can then put together with good morning may please the court well google proposes here on appeal it is a rejection of the comparison of the actual structures the structure claimed the high pass filter and the structures taught in the prior art a low pass filter and reflector instead what google propose is a result oriented analysis google argues that two different structures should be assumed to be the same if they ultimately get the same end result but this results oriented analysis is improper for several reasons st and same it's an audio player it should ultimately get the same sound coming out at the end what makes one audio coder different from another audio recorder are the things that happen in between the input and the output the structures inside the box we open it up to see what's inside is it is basically your argument that i can eat my corn with a fork or a spoon in both cases it gets to my mouth that doesn't make a fork into a spoon a spoon into a fork more or less yes or not much more that you need this probably not your honor pass filter satisfying the high pass filter limitation well the question is the claim construction the claim construction is quite simple for high pass filter it has to do two things it has to attenuate the low frequency and have to take out the low frequency and take out the high frequency in your code those two things differently what's going on i figure two is theirs alone has filters we have to take out the low frequency encoding and basically what's happening there is a design or high pass filter in addition to taking out the low frequency and using it coding in low frequency it says hey we can just take that loop back around and subtract it out of the full zero day colored six so what's going on as far as a high pass filter is that subtract are two thousand and twenty nine or twenty dollars and basically the same ones transmit as a high frequency and we're subtracting out the low frequency so it's still transmitting high attenuating low it happens that it's building a sort of design or high pass filter on the fly rather than using a pre built one based on the internal but even under that situation it meets the claim construction so regardless of whether a low pass filter or however you're going to function to make your signal the question is to transmit this you  your spec discloses a spork well i mean the question really is it could be anything it could be is there a spark plug in a particular engine you know just because the car works doesn't mean there's a spark plug inside you have to look inside take that thing out and say to a mechanic is this a sparkle if we were to go in a talker and take out the combination of low pass filter and the reflector and show it to a person has drawn the art they said no that's not a high pass filter because it's not going to high pas raised in this case in the petition that this element the high pass filter and the final element of the claim is obvious in light of what's disclosed in tucker but nonetheless it seems like it might be since what's in tucker is a more complicated way to create something that functions like a high pass filter even though it's not a high pass filter so given that high pass filter is sort of an off the shelf product that most electrical engineers would know and that was disclosed in tucker seems to be a slightly more complex version of changing the same result why wouldn't it be  obvious st of all with respect to that the patent describes what the benefit is over systems like talk they're trying to obtain a computational benefit the inclusion of the high pass filter is an ultimate result of what they're trying to achieve what is the benefit of using a high and it is not necessary to apply downsampling since the high pass filter in the low pass filter both require a little computational capacity and a downsampled as admitted the total required computation capacity is reduced i think taper it's easier and signal the original signal sporty you're actually getting it goes a low what you wanted and above what is wanted an interpolation process in general is simply expanding and usually using a low pass filter and the example i gave if you're so regionally your down sampling of forty eight signal l p c coding that so when i'm talking about your originally starting with a forty eight i'm talking on the receiver side where the downsampling comes down simply because of the receiver upsampling occurs on the me the transmitter and the upsampling occurs on the receiver side so we're talking about those two things you're getting a ghost where normally if you had a full gear to tell a good signal you would have a go should have the right signal because you're only doing a sampling and downsampling because i didn't see that mccauley no you want us not in the claim that it is sort of the and i know council get up here and say that we're reading in a limitation of excluding and downsampling are an example rather that's just the context of the broader idea of what patents trying to do was trying to simplify the able overall process it could simplify on one side by doing all these things what's claim is the use of a high pass filter because i stated that had high pass filter is really don't require much effort so if you're taking  basically what's in talker and let's even say you know what's not to talk about the upsampling process there's part of an interpolation process which is a low pass filter and the end of the reflection process ultimately getting rid of all that but even if you look at just part  i've i want to begin by batting back this notion that somehow we're trying to reject the structure of the claims i mean this is not a result driven analysis based on the fact that ultimately the tougher system creates the correct audio signal fundamentally the purported innovation here is a particular array of structural components that separately and code is as my friend on the other side explained the band and the high band the low band using an off the shelf narrow band in voter and what is in the claims the st decoder and then the high band using the sequence of components that in clues shaping annoy signal using l p c coefficients the idea being that in the high band which is harder for the human ear to hear if you're caught in a voice that's good enough for the talker system does that too and it does it with all of the same components the only question is whether the it's not only just one component it's the right half of the box twenty six qualifies as a high pass filter the high pass filter there that could use judge moore's analogy it's like you have an entire play setting and the question is is this fish fork does it qualify as a fork and the answer is yes under the no not really because the look at the altar look i mean my analogy was there's a high pass filter special time those are two different things and there's no doubt your expert describe what's in that little dotted line box on the right that you're calling a high pass filter is actually a low class pas because it functions the same as the spoon but it or the port but it doesn't make it into a for the definition is functional that your are the definition is is based on whether it transmits the upper frequency band and whether it there are embodiments of high class filters that have a low pass filter as a component of this is just another one high pass filter here uses a low pass filter internally as the st step but none of this sounds like claim construction to me at all sounds like substantial evidence and what does tucker disclose i know you love to be in the claim construction land is that gets you to a dino's base but none of what you're arguing is claim construction all of what you're arguing is whether i should construe that little dotted line box from tucker