incredibly expensive claim construction which seems to me you're going to have a lot of trouble surviving validity challenges based on the vehicle response emergency response system of one star which  well i think that is the specification of the patent and it sets forth that the term as it just isn't limited to commercial promotional and market marketing about there are examples in the summary of the invention which refers to on line messages throughout the entire patent it talks about targeted messages now one of the big points of novelty and patent that came up during the prosecution history is this actual classification that occurs over a half server which is based on  distribution of goods and services now we would argue that the district court's construction of messages actually ignores the distribution of goods and services aspects of that explanation and consistent with that general had no direct marketing well but they were saying the targeted messages don't have to be commercial marketing and promotion they could be for example there could be a message sent to the car for a recall campaign i would consider getting a message saying that's you know a bolt on my door needs to be replaced because the parts been recalled because the commercial promotional our marketing mention that a promotional market would do well i would think so because i would think that the doctor they would already know who their doctor is if they're actually getting this actual communication from their doctor i would think would be set up by her doctor but certainly there could be a situation where a patient could get an ad for some kind of a prescription or something like that and again we aren't we aren't denying that this make this patent covers marketing  correct but that actual there's a very subtle difference between the district court's interpretation associated with respect to the products and with our posts construction make any difference but that's correct that's correct now turning to the networks construction in this construction of the district or actually replace the word network signalling claim set so both parties came up with the construction of this entire phrase and claim seven and the pollies replace the word network single in their messages whereas we just left the word through six use messages and claims seven through eighteen use networks to know which seems to indicate that there is a difference between a message and a network saying no and from our viewpoint the difference is that firm they stipulated to not infringement the district court in this case didn't actually making finding or determination this is appealed to us on the basis of a stipulation if they didn't stipulate with regard to associate the client how could we possibly assume you mean the e mail communication back and forth the stipulation itself never highlights the word associated client as being the basis and since that is the actual document which forms the basis of your ability to come up on us to appeal on us i  don't see how an e mail back and forth between the two of you about what associated client meeting may or may not be included in the appeal itself is necessary i think this says she thinks she should be able to appeal messages and network and if she wins on either of those then it goes back to when we stipulate she also thinks associated client was wrongly decided now they believe they can work with that definition and still prove infringement but hey while she's here maybe they're willing to go ahead and address it anyway to prevent future problems with the district court in the likely sense of the of another appeal should she win on messages and so i guess what she's saying to us seems to be consistent with with that network the message is carried over the net as a network signal to networks signal but usually when i think of a network signal popping up on my computer it's telling me about something happening to the network not application offer an explicit definition for messages that would be broader than those example the patent does offer a specific definition messages but it is not the it's not so i think it's unfair that the only place where we're in right here just because someone's a bad speller doesn't mean they spelled it the out every time and right here there's nothing grammatical improper and in fact the construction blue green red and all color you know what's the point of saying blue green and red if all colors are options and here you use a commercial promotion in marking the symbol audio text still image i mean what is included ultimately in this list if we construe it the way you want us to construe it well i think basically any kind of targeted message is included i think the past year gave a list of the examples of the types of messages they could think of but good we already do an issue of just having this broad unfettered term because of the actual plain language itself which dictates that a message is only sent based on this classification based on a class action why would you need to say commercial promotional or marketing symbol does that mean other symbols that are not commercial promotional or marketing are excluded but then say any or do you know texts video or other  content it's it's a really strange way to draft what you're asking for i would agree that the wording is a little closely but i think i don't think that you're given in this that no concrete examples of a message that's conveyed isn't a promotional commercial message you're saying there could be messages but nothing in the spec actually recalled the carburetor on your car stopped by your local mercedes dealership to have that part replaced i mean that would seem to me to be a commercial message saying it could if there are examples think who would possibly not be commercial section there's absolutely no reference at all to direct marketing to commercial promotional or marketing messages that summary of the invention refers to the message just much more broadly just on line messages targeted