thank your honor may i please the court order signed morton's i represent affinity labs in two thousand the year honors two inventors faced the problem of getting your own digital music to play in your car and came up with two totally different solutions to some or no i have a real problem with the record specifically old lack of information for example on page twenty seven twenty eight of the film's opening free it says affordable computers of the the the things that you pointed out there but when i read while reading from your free just your honor and i turn to it as quick as i as i have a page twenty seven starting with so for example a portable computer last full paragraph running them are all of the examples that are given in the past the pad talks about those sites out by a p d a cellular telephone or a portable radio all of the examples that are actually given in the at last at the bottom beginning with however before the board incidents in national decision on ill and so on running through time to the products of affinity labs had accused apple you know what i think the assertion from two ninety four is that apple took a license principals of affinity labs who participated in the go shoot of the settlement with apple what supports them what your foundation what have you done that i have a declaration signed it says my notes say it doesn't say that i'm not sure i understood the question of this this does show the third party request or apple just notice of the parties the proceeding had reached an agreement the request of a lot of participating in the present reexamination very well so so that reference your honor is simply a standard m p three player the goal of that was to actually add some additional memory to that actually three player there's nothing in that reference that has any to do with connecting to a second set lame down next to last name down next allowance say all the elements are there and the idea was to add the display of the name to lab and if you did that you would still not have any portable audio file player because loud is mounted in the  the thing that's missing is the display right you name in and name all that's all that's been relied upon from main is the display name to probably get a music seems right we get the references right you do have the references then what's missing is a description of having one display that has selectable icons on it so you can play your music wherever you want with that no reason anyone would add the display of names to lousy music server whether it was mouse in the trunk or mounted on the dashboard but definitely no reason for the display in the trunk and no reason to put two displays on the dashboard so that combination just doesn't make any nothing stated in name if we want to go beyond that includes the suggestion motivation doesn't have to be just around come across it can be in the nature of the problem to be solved so these two inventors i started with looked at this problem of getting your music downloaded into your current camp with two completely different solutions what allowed said as far as a portable audio file player was that it doesn't have enough storage yet there's no place to put it in the cab the only solution name doesn't say anything about those issues about using names in a vehicle to connect to the vehicle the only actual evidence in the record of what a person skill in the art of bottoms of two thousand is allowing himself discouraging any reader of law from using a portable audio file player to do his his solution in the car he said that it would be as i said as i said not enough memory he said nor to put it he said the only thing that he could imagine that she would use it for is this fact makes clear that it's device can be connected to multiple head units the way it would connect a multiple head unit would be for to be removed from the trunk and carry to another vehicle inserted perhaps and added from perhaps inserted into that vehicles had to do a lot also disclose that it's devices can have data mode it into a directly into its ram directly from a personal computer the only way for that to happen is for the device to be removed from the car and taken to the personal computer to have date a little bit so it is portable but even if it were not portable be in the trunk or the head unit or it could be somewhere else in the car was not living in that sense it allows it to person to use the head unit controls to control the device in the car now loud laws say that the use of the portable because it teaches away from not because it does not teach that the system will not work it just teaches that it is a dangerous use of the system with the given in p three players that was specifically referring to as mr morton pointed out  doesn't work but look talking about motivations of combined references is not relevant it is relevant your honor but its relevance for whether something can be combined is a technical matter not whether or not a particular individual thinks this is a good idea or a bad idea for example louds says is also concerned about it being dangerous for the driver operate the device that doesn't mean that the device could not be operated by someone or someone else in the vehicle or whether cars  parked and i don't think for example but an admonition that is not a good idea to text while driving is a teaching a way of the capability of texting while driving it doesn't take away the technical capability that technical capabilit you remove it from the car it has no power it has no display it has no speakers or headphones there's no ability to play music and therefore is not an audio file player it has to be plugged in and mounted into the car to be that the thing that i want to point out is i'm going to address the record directly on this one whole issue of secondary considerations i do think it is important to understand here that  propose obviously this car mounted solution and russell white proposed a very different solution and we have put in evidence and it is in the record at a one ninety eight that as of two thousand and ten ninety percent of vehicles have left russell white proposed in his patent they have the ability to connect to an i pad to a portable electronic device and nobody followed the loudest understand what that is so saying that something is portable because as the board said the car carries a rules around about passengers therefore it moves about the music server in the trunk it's it's clear here and it shows a decision maker that in this case was just looking to find any reason at all to invalidate this pat so what we have here is a situation where someone proposed the correct solution is being challenged by a patent filed twenty days earlier where someone proposed the wrong solution and the decision maker and it is like this where obviousness is a question of law has a lot of power to do what's right and in other words if we agree with you in a home korean i would love to be home for iran or the the record is that there were additional rejections by the examiner the board took up two of them had to drop one of them because that was probably was not actually prior art and so they were down to their best their best one left which was not so in my view this was the best projection that was there and that's what the board when went and asked for reversal