internally different from the in has a different objective reach one is different about what's different is that the doctor is not the control or the hospital the medical institution medical professionals source site institutional disturb of the record is not there to use the data quality controls the hospitals and doctors offices traditional record is as good or better as it was at the point of origination is it in your opinion fit into this non re if a record gets is good after being going through the process of being entered and chat is as good as it was when it was created is it subject and that creates not a p d f it's not it's not the fact that the record was vetted although as you can see from looking at figure eight for example there's a wall series of steps that describe specifications the service provider would go through those steps the record would have been fitted if there are in force for many doctors in consistenc repeat that don't work in a patient base trying terrorists and somebody skilled in the medical records orders would know that it was the patients who control the doctor the hospital or other medical institution it's not your honor they're very similar the claims in fourteen eighty two are slightly more complex than the claims fifteen eighty one and think the board points out that the reason snowden is few days patient based is because snowden allows for ownership and control for the record there is no articulation in the or decision that says it's simply because the patient treated in fact the patient doesn't control the medical diagnosis of the doctor that was into that record in snowden still perform an examination in snow doctors still document what that like temperature critical to vital a spects of the patients examination and data going to record a patient would have the power to alter that snow either so equally just as in snow as in the application of the patient doesn't really have the power to alter the medical information in the record what the patient does have and snowden has the power to determine who gets access to that record for example patient gets an examination by doctor a hospital way that documentation goes into the record then another doctor in another part of the country wants to have access to that record the patient can give that second doctor permission to access it so in that sense the patient controls the record snow but snow in the patient's no never has the power to go in and alter the examination that took place gets an examination by a doctor or health care provider while an examination takes place another party can be in the room with a which they probably transcribe or write or that helps record down what the doctor is observing and then he checks it is correct  and initials then are an indication by the healthcare provider that is certifying that that record is accurate and complete and before any report can go out before it can be transmitted before be put into this medical documentation system all that look at the blue brief if you look at the reply you'll see that all that's been our computers claim one everything is rising and falling with claim one this case so really in our arguments are focused on a claim won and i don't think there's any dispute about these other cla repeatedly keep saying that the examiner failed to follow proper test of obviousness and he brings up one of our lead he brings up issues of secondary considerations if we pointed this out or briefed that this task biasness we believe is well settled case are the steps of going through an obvious analysis which is fighting the fire fighting yet prior to comes from the parkfield combining to fire are showing why they would be combined all of us here only then after all that's happened with the  no person of skill in this art would combine the snowden patient maybe system with the shepard medical record verifying within the doctor based system is going to be seen as applicable in a big patient based system as a matter of fact the patient based system inherently suggests that it's going to be  modifiable by patients and therefore unreliable while in with all due respect your honor although that may seem like that's an implication when you read the reference in particular the snow it doesn't say  information as well as potential for increased litigation they're concerned about potentially being all to which met snowden sought to jump over better we want to have a patient based system but at the same time we want to be sure that you know ensure that it's it's accurate and secure it's not being altered they were concerned about exactly when and and they addressed it so i think the implication that you suggest that if we didn't have any means reference of products that sounds logical but when you read those references they say we want to make sure the records that are built whether it's patient based or institution base we want to make sure we trust that's really what they're concerned about and i think back is the crux of how it's argument that he feels because no station base the lack of liability the doctors have of records patients control but didn't solve no but it's at least suggesting that one of skill in the art would then combine because you have to see that if the doctors no longer has control of a patient based record then in fact a claim that