ok the last case before the court case number one five two zero six one motorola mobility versus microsoft again a decision from the patent trial an appeal board think that's that's the first part of yes the parts are in agreement that when we're looking at the the notion of when we're loading in displaying content that's happening within this this mode and the board's construction is attempting to create this notion of the  displaying the content of attempting to restrict the claim to an incremental form of loading to display the content and that's where we disagree the claims go should not be so limited it's a narrow to require in all instances incremental loading and display the content and so when you think incremental learning means you've got staring you in the face while you're sitting there watching the page load right display i believe that other than just these ten point zero the reason we did not run it was because of what the claims go in with the specifications described as we look at the specification and the language that was added about three years into the prosecution is that we only had this figure three and figure four described in the specification where there was a display of the compton during the loading mode in its entirety there was no condition at all within the claim whatsoever or within the specification that there would be a partial display my thinking from trying i mean having a difficult time when you say display during loading mode so you're saying that that you're only talking about that final last point and that during the loading mode it doesn't include the entirety of the loading mode you do disclose or you do display all of the content during the loading oh yes ok so learning about starts here yes right and pentland doesn't display the content tell here correct correct even so i gree that that's in the loading mode microsoft agrees that that's still in the loading mode so you're saying that that all of this there's no display you're saying they don't even claim a display and don't know what we're saying is is that all this is keying off of the display of the status i the content whether it's incremental or whether it's a single increment of load and display ok so i guess you're you're saying the claim covers an environment where during the loading mode the loading icon shows up or is flashing on the screen somehow yes and then the rest of the display during the loading mode could be just looking were you the user just looking at the preexisting web page correct before right and then the next thing that changes on the screen could be a disappearing of the preexisting web page and then an appearance of a complete version of the new web content in the content viewing area as it loads i mean i'll just be honest with you when i read that phrase that to me very clearly unambiguous lee is communicating that to the user during the content loading mode mode it is watching the page load before your very eyes and you can probably words come first and then the picture comes second and maybe the picture doesn't come instantly disclosure of any specific mechanism that mandated that you had to slice content that we're looking at in the context of what we have this entire mass of content and let's just lay it partially and i'm not  that that could not be within the scope of this claim i'm not trying to exploit that although i do believe it's not disclosed i it would be saying is that even if that's would sound like the common and ordinary meaning of those words because i have to say i'm with judge chen in terms of just reading those words you're saying that that somehow there are some specifications disclaimer  asked and that we're supposed to act school was an area where we would have a single load and single display that's so you're saying you can't point to anything in the spec that you think would lead us away from this notion we're just saying incremental display and break a page and the content vs images or perhaps render vision which partial i do not believe the sport was back but i'm not trying to specifically exclude today what i'm saying that is that even if we have the notion of incremental loading there is nothing this persecution that we should not cannot must not construe the claim to x clued in operation where the content is loaded in this way to the single st until we're done with the load and display action and then remove it so the whole point years we want to conclude our load and display stuff before we signify to the user that we're transitioning so we're learning the user we're in this process you've clicked the is simply the busy clock somebody has clicked on the link and the puter is too busy doing other things in order to respond to the user's kleck what this does not just disclose is displaying content as it loads there is no depiction in any of the pages that google submitted moralists of it to the patent office any content being displayed no of none of the external content that is being content in a while loading in a fully loaded mode and other words there like you now said with respect to your claim is that you display it incrementally and you also display it in a fully loaded mode during the loading process right not necessarily if i understand correctly your are our position is that the you do disclose what during the loading process you disclose the content as as you go spike that's right those are positions and in particular the second thing it doesn't doesn't disclose it never discloses the busy clock and the content cycle dangerously so it doesn't disclose and why doesn't disclose displaying content as it's loading door during the process of loading wallowing during that so i didn't say it takes ten seconds to load everything it doesn't disclose displaying the content during the ten seconds we will  assume that eventually the content shows up right but not during the ten seconds that it took to look no disclosure of that nor is there any disclosure that the busy clock appears wild when the content appears so as far as th disclosure is concerned and in fact this is the only rational reading of that visit the busy clock has disappeared long before that ten seconds the purpose of the busy clock is the say to the user that we know our display looks understood your argument from your priest so are you saying that your claims don't necessarily require incremental loading so in other words they don't nestle require a showing of content during the entirety of the lo now doesn't mean that you know it may load there may be a slight lag to disappear is a practical matter the user sees the content as it loads and you see the temporary graphic then what happens the graphic disappears and that tells the user ok it's all  finger three is described we disagree with this with my friend and if one turns to page two column for line fifty four this is a description of figure three so figure three is referenced at column for line fifteen and then the next paragraphs here including my fifty four fifty three fifty four are referring to figure three it says that beginning a line fifty three or four quote rather the browser is configured to display a temporary graphic element sixty four over the content viewing area during times when the browser is loading context so it is referring to figure three as a time it which the browser is loading contact and then if we look at figure three it is displaying content in fact it's the splaying the it appears from the static image it's displaying all the content but what the spec describes the written description does dr says that figure three is a period when the browser is loading contacts and the figure three shows context so it shows you have to look at the text and the figure together to see a disclosure that during this period of  loading content indeed the browser is displaying content we also would submit that the argument is is a written description argument the plant meeting has now been vetted to ask me when and where during that's how the understood motorola admitted it and then i think that my the comment that the board got the construction wrong we disagree with that the the board simply said the very logical point that just go back to all and with a theatrical analogy if i go to the current idea so we have in our brief the notion that if there's two ways of doing this you could have the curtain up so the audience sees the scenery when it's being loaded on the stage by the stage dance that's one way of doing it and obviously when you do that at the end of their work you see all of the loaded scenery that's the way the claim is talking about what penn point does if you're a different pen point the curtain is down as far as the disclosure concerned the scenery is low behind the scenes nobody sees it and then the curtain goes up and it's all there those are completely different ways of doing things and that's all the board was saying and refer to page eighty eight this is the board displayed when all the loaded content is displayed as requester seems to suggest this content is not displayed as it floats but rather after it looks so way to me for you to say that the me but the board specifically said that there are two separate months a content loading and the loaded mode and it and it said the content loading mode it must not include displaying all loaded content but you're saying that if it can everything after it's loaded but that's not the same as doing it during waiting ten seconds to display it is not the same as doing it during the ten seconds so that's that's fine for purposes of the distinction between  and your claims to the extent that that's what the board was talking about but but this language that i'm talking about where they talked about the two temporal aspects of the modes that was in their claim constructions well but but they said to include displaying all read they seem to acknowledge this they say even if it's displayed when all the loaded content is displayed which which is fine we agree that that doesn't mean you were doing it during the ten seconds that's all they're saying now they language then isolation is confusing they say to construe the content loading vote to include displaying all loaded content i e after loads completely what they meant was that isn't good enough you can construe this content loaded period as being web page is the identical we've agreed to that yes so i guess what i'm wondering is it looks read just looking at the figures that the content loading mode shows a web page that is fully loaded but the girl there in the scriptures says it's not the written description again says so but when you look at the saviour's you we all agreed that they're showing the identical web page we agree that it appears to be the identical webpage content loading the practical matter is that the drafter didn't bother to do a very good job with the drawing but perhaps wasn't too worried about that because he had or she ha it doesn't show anything that's required at this content loading it doesn't show the graphic appearance during display of content but that's my point and they're showing the craft and of the graphic they're not showing the graph graphic while you the user get to watch the new page slowly building on the screen that's correct but that's not completely it's also good to see the graphic when you see any of the content even  like that was already an established practice in the arts why would only say i would think that motorola google if there was better art they could have found that they're well equipped and this is what they came up with that's what i'm saying is i'm a little concerned f microsoft with this patent in terms of its ultimate validity well i can't speak to that obviously claim is a whole other limitations the spec described the admitted  having certain of these elements but that the difference was back then with a slow loading small handheld that you had this graphic and it didn't take up space the claim specifies that it's obstructing some content it's only temporary it's not taking up space on the toolbar and certainly it is true with small screens things like that matter a lot in terms of legit have some permanent graphic it's obscuring tool bar or task bar so i can't personally say that  description the background big tribute admission that the challenge here did not the one with the challenge did not combine admitted art and point the one of three challenge that the examiner had to deal with the board had to deal with was simply on pad point no disclose the specific combined of displaying content incrementally and we look at the citation referenced here there's not even the notion of displaying the content were displaying a temporary graphic when the browser is loading content there's no disclosure of displaying content incrementally your own that's a separate question right about again yes i would agree i think that also going back to what the were trying to reconcile this language in the claim with what's actually disclosed in the specification i want to first touch on that where in ten points to you does it show any display of any contact with pinpoint before the curtain comes up s and it's all about this program environment where people display documents conflate display tactical splay can split images and it teaches that throughout this process for all applications that when it's doing something including loading promote file the sing the screen until your application is no longer busy and then you send a message to the manager with the visit off signal to remove the icon from the screen so it's teaching it again  have a system describing it you can sway documents on the screen that you can click on hyperlinks and they display a clock when the application is busy doing whatever the optician happens to be doing and then when it's done with its process to remove the clock we believe that renders obvious loading and supply content when you're displaying the basic loc because that's what your application is busy doing ok i'd also point out that in the initial initial reexamination claims for the core you were actually emotionally from obvious over the pen point references it wasn't until this claim construction was adopted that