crash or something like that not just if it isn't is it just that you don't know the answer but so you're you are you suggesting that a united airlines could decide what it wanted to record very representative data correct that that five minute segment or whatever that i'm talking about their work arounds for the whole seven twenty set just for your client said we make a decision that there's a piece of this black box information that we can trump and then we'll all be transmitted once we get on the ground yes to whoever it is and one want to know what was what happened our association i don't want to interrupt your argument but i just was trying to figure out because when i read that and i could not figure out you know if i were a competitor how do i know what aircraft data representative is for start think the references do have shortcomings with start with s t m sixty nine with the disregard how there was that f e m six nine taught away from the invention that was the key part for the just a part in finding that there wasn't substantial evidence but there's it's lower is true so it's lower that's true but it also has fewer errors and very purpose of the s c m sixty nine reference was to say you spread spectrum if you look at page eight thirty nine seventy two of the records in a thirty nine seventy three you'll see that the reference teaches disadvantages of gateway was originally decided in fewer than make that much difference because your client just dropped a whole lot of the information out anyhow which m specifically said collect this data look at this data and so the part was rich with examples of doing just that the only difference was using sprint instead of some other technique and then you had f c m sixty nine trial months before the invention harris's invention and that specifically says use of spectrum and again i'd really ask that you look at page thirty nine seventy two when you have a chance because that talks about how would  between the airport and the airplane then you have speaker next you have to hire an employee and have him go and get the floppy disk off the airplane and take it in the water disadvantages asked c m sixty nine reference isn't teaching away from that you can have as many as twenty five type three users who type three users being the kind that are using this these large data files and that's it page a thirty nine seventy nine specifically type three user twenty five so i think that you can't ignore the plain teaching of the s c m sixty nine reference and those teachings or square corners you have the suggestion specifically to put the invention in airplanes and then the only question is when you put it in airplanes are you going to transmit during the flight but you can't it's a spread spectrum and as a teacher is you've got to transmit and in thing you spread spectrum to transmit and trains and thence and use that airplanes obviously would transmit until after the entire flight and there's even evidence admitting that from harris's own inventor admitting that if you wanted to has nothing to do with the four square corners what f c m sixty nine teaches he also said they asked him if there would be more errors there some testimony about that if you look at that testimony that was cited it actually he was asked a hypothetical he was asked assume that c d m a which is a particular type of spread spectrum operates differently than it actually does when there be more errors and he said yes and that's the testimony that cited by the district representative data has the system and fedex has never said that it's not going to use the system in fact if you look at the just court order on the injunction it says pacifically when he granted the injunction the system was already removed and he said fed ex has not indicated that it is not going to put the systems back on and that's why it granted the injunction i'll give it two minutes b and that the definition one of ordinary skill the artist completely missing from federal express is brief it's a fairly young engineer three to five years experience so the question to a jury a factual question is what w difficult to overcome and so what the square has done is said well it's not only look at what one worries call the art would you the references but let's look at the secondary considerations and the secondary considerations are also fact question for success if i follow that path all those were factual issues cited by the jury first and then by the presiding judge moving to the issue of the claim destruction in let me address  is a d f a a you it was a program that was started and what they said is we want to we want you trying to keep an eye on how the planes are flown and maintenance alike in what the trial testimony was is mind that it was government suggested that the airline should take this type of program in order to sort of keep an eye on on how the planes are flown and i think this is not for the record low to milian it failed because the pilots unions and the like but the program but the government wouldn't care if your wife thought it was empty the government would care that the black box black box mandated but this is the black box information part of what data to the data in there for the company that's got their plans but also to the public interest in terms of knowing what the so called black box information that's for and fed actions aside it will be no way just to chop some of that out well you know let me minute the system claims or pricing claims they talk about the system fenix what they did they didn't chop it out they added some software that said if we choose we can we can choose to not for us to say that they were entitled to non infringement asked of the designer well i would argue that in the case that was tried on the well i would say that i would disagree with the court because that issue was not see that in front of the jury no i wouldn't be in for the jury because the thing that we're going construction because you can try that case right but there was no reason to try that case because the claim construction held that it required  order i think it's a seventy six new predicts the judge went ahead in consider evidence in all the factors that were that were some which were not for the jury such is the summary judgment through things like that so i think the court still dealt with it as a legal issue while he references the last time i think it's a fair reading of the judge's willfulness analysis is that he treated as though it was a legal analysis and he didn't rely strictly on have a leg to stand on their claim construction so if we were to reverse the claim construction to say that he got it wrong with regard to what had to be transmitted and then it should goes back to him for the novo review of the software patch was not added till the case was well underway so there were several years that federal express willfully infringed without any suggestion that they had a design around and without any need for any  is designed to record or train for what's done with it after the plane lands in it was a future concepts and maintenance and we there's references to the maintenance materials being transfer of the passenger logs being transferred it's in that's the key of why one of ordinary skill new york would have to analyze the speed of c m sixty nine hours the ng reference in reference simply has alliances we can apply it to planes but the there's no but the uniqueness of scrap spectrums is fairly limited range and so the way being reference was set up as it went by a station it would shoot information to receivers one by the station an airplane as it flies wouldn't have that type of you know every reason to combine the revers you've got everything you need well then we have a different case and i would have the evidence that would develop otherwise i said i certainly won't concede that all that's there but certainly that would have been a different teach downloading comprehensive lieu of flight performance and comprehensive long term picture of the entire flight so that this court were to change that construction there should be a new trial on obviousness in addition i wanted to asked the jury themselves to look at this prior art with respect to expert testimony being needed here expert testimony isn't needed because this is the simple dispute and the question is