lower gas comprising oxygen because i don't depend on how you measure your time yes yes ronald but if you agree with us on that claim that alone would require a reversal of claim four of the seven  six but i'd like to start with the obviousness issues involving a combination of yamamoto's high speeds i'm sorry strict casting method with the other references and if you agree with us on that then that would mean the claims five and six of the three five patent and claims eleven and twelve on the seven six five patent require reversal or would be revived the board was required to articulate a reason why a person of skill in the art would have pursued the combination of yamamoto's stri side did not seem to dispute the other side's view that there be a motivation to go with the rapid cooling strip casting method because you would produce a more uniform alloy was that or accurate depiction of what you did or did not do for the board in response to the petitioners advanced motivation a combined theory of a more uniform alloy i don't think the word said that we did not dispute that there would have been a motivation to come on the board said that we didn't dispute that the elements were known in the art and that it would have been technologically feasible to combine the elements but i thought they also said a little more that that the other side said one motivation would be to produce more uniform alloy and the patentee did not dispute that so i don't think that works or not but the the more predictable i'm sorry the more uniform out of the way that the board cited was a citation to the petitioners reply brief and and the alliance and cited only a statement from its expert and that the school arson would know that you'd have a serious legal problem if you did that so you put on essentially the evidence they would recognize the yield problem settings which is to say they would have known to adjust the second polarisation steps to avoid that problem why is that not enough together because our evidence our expert dr louis explained it is not as simple as just adjusting the jack know that whenever you make women what it is what is it what it says quote from exhibit twenty eleven to i don't remember that's from lead which is one of the sentence twice a person of ordinary skill would have known to him just basic fundamental jet milling settings to accommodate the uniform particle size and shape distribution of the strip gets alloy that's from the petitioner's reply brief which then cites in discusses the li reference which talks about how you want to adjust milling parameters to avoid having too many super fine particles and then the reply brief also quotes dr lewis deposition testimony you know in full in two pages i think it's something like eight twenty one fifteen in the j and that how yes dr lewis acknowledges that you would know how to adjust the jet milling parameters in order to change the kinds of desired particle sizes you would watch in the alternate and powder that made a fine control the amount of super fine particles but she in her declaration she went on and to explain that if you don't then adjust the inputs that go in the time you make it one of these changes to the overall process you have to go back  enough but the board and this is putting completely to one side the i agree quite odd thing the board said about you know on a monday we consider the commercial motivation and to say we that doesn't make any sense and commercial motivation it's a kind of motivation for doing something but this is independent of that and i'm not sure why it's not and i don't think it is an appendage way because i think that the evidence that i just mentioned that is from dr loss decoration i i just want to pursue this because that's actually to me seems pretty critical what is it i mean seems to me that if only indirectly the board is referring to certain evidence and in order for and it actually seems to sort of find they would have known not just how to do it but known to do it known to do it and we would have to find that it would be unreasonable lacking in substantial evidence for that or to credit this reading have you think that's a it's simple just they would know to do it well but dr loses decorations says that actually there are a lot of different things that would go into it you would have to change the is what you're which is what you're doing when you're when your motivation is commercial success then spiffed casting was a pretty well known as devilish technique by the time of this patent application came around right it wasn't some mysterious our book technique for coming up with an alloy that's right but there's no there was no prior reference that had combined struck casting with the other steps that are in the pattern and that bradley we pick up where mr heron left off about claim for and claim three i know you there's something that's really the main event but i'd like to know because i mean i was a little troubled by the fact that the specification very very consistently the only time to talks about the in lines fifty six three sixty removed so just like the claim says you have the broader second polarisation stat which comprises both pulverizing and removal that's what the claim sets and you look at the specification and it says right here that and then where would be that other example of the usage of the phrase high speed float gas in the specification i think it hinges on the notion that as the parties agree this is all part of the jet milling process and if we look at figure two at council  removing them just as shown in these claims and the parties have found earth greed in the order found that all these limitations are satisfied the issue only is what are the claims mean here under this interpretation of the more provided of just the correct interpretation who argued that some amount of auction cannot be entirely removed from that milling chamber that middle chamber i figure to that was a dispute to the board is whether even under their claim construction whether there are still say we've got his great new idea never been done before he's equally applicable to what does that tell us about the prior art what it tells you is that the basic process that they claim does not get don't have certain claims focused on the special method when you're employing strip casting and different parameters when you're employing it casting the coins that are or have been invalidated are equally apt especially in the a person of skill in the art as the or found absolutely knew how to adjust the parameters to make it work so when you have on page mr hero referred to if you're going to do something downstream in the process you have to also make some changes upstream in the process can you make me about that to some extent it's all interrelated if you end up with if you strip casting instead of being at casting you you're now ahead of the game and so when you move on to the polarization steps you already have you're already in a better spot because you're going to end up with a particle size distribution that isn't all over the place because you started out through strip passing by getting  of skill in the art is just a machine or an arm aton and doesn't know that's the board found one would know to adjust the parameters and so even dr lewis testifies that that the death knowing parameters could be adjusted to control the amount of super fine particles resulting from the jet milling machine and her answer was yes this does get back to first well their own expert supported our position and joined in phenix number you know what i'm talking about i really trusted that i do recall but also i wasn't sure what he was referring to and i think he was referring to some place in dr lewis's testimony where she said this would be beyond the level of skill to figure out not only something to do with the jet milling parameters but also in terms of trying to figure out what composition or even to start with  make that alloy that's produced by the strip casting about i don't believe that was what her testimony was but let me say this part that is part of their view is that they come in and say open up or lewis said this the standard of review for this court to apply is whether there are substantial evidence supporting the findings the board did make the anticipation finding the findings underlying the obviousness determinations the fact that if it is a fact and i'm not sure i don't think it is what they do it's what you just describe your honor for down on a p x thirteen and sixteen the board found and supported by evidence found that somebody would have known how to make these adjustments and would have known what to do that's absolutely supported by substantial evidence so even if  something different and i don't think she did it it wouldn't matter because it's not whether there is contrary evidence is there substantial evidence and absolutely there is the board going on at some length describing the benefits of combining on a mot goes back to the notion of whether the person doing this is just an autumn aton blindly importing things without adjusting that parameter for thinking at all about what they're doing that's not what the or found the board found that a person stealing yarn i know how to adjust with not if you employ strip casting you would end up with a more homogenous material and if you just blindly proceeded and then still got rid of say everything below five microns or two microns well now you would be getting rid of more hasegawa would require a significant amount of experimentation to adjust the composition of the alloa so that the final magnet has superior magnetic properties and that that would utilize capabilities beyond that of one of typical skill in the art so we're not talking about real not arguing that and personally aren't wouldn't know that that something would need to be adjusted but dr loses explanation was that and doing that adjustment would be beyond the capabilities of someone of ordinary skill would a person of ordinary skill at the time of the invention understand that the parameters could be adjusted to control the amount of super fine particles yes what a person understands they could be adjusted yes but that doesn't somebody smarter than me could do it but not me exactly and so to get back to your question to show and the it that this is a complicated process any time you change a component of the overall