your argument next to number two thousand and ten twelve maybe three american pile driving against etc the district queerer or district courts incorrectly construed the principal term eccentric weight portion to geometrically require to state what was essential is that all of the eccentric weight is considered as part of the eccentric weight portion similar to a recent case by this quirk which wasn't in the briefs because it was decided on september twenty first after the briefs had been submitted the insurable mask versus and then a good portion we mean having the gaiters around the periphery of the of that portion of the device the eccentric reading portion speaks to functionally as opposed to geometric and we believe and submit that it should include all of the eccentric moment and there are a number of reasons why throughout the patent the eccentric weight portion was disclosed as position the center of gravity the center of gravity of the counterweight itself is determined by all of the eccentric right whether it's in front of the gear or part of the gear reason why we submit why the patent he uses the functional terminology of eccentric weight portion is so as not to limit it to any regard man as being the gear cylindrical gear portion of the accused device q include could be called little ledge as well or is it some construct consisting the answer would be the face of the cylinder portion can be the base that is next to the teeth and the protruding eccentric feature which comes off of the could be extended for that's not that in other words the portion of the gear which is most of the of the gear body that goes down from the ledge section on either side right you say is not the face is not part of the gear forward from the front face of the gear portion the good portion has a weight distribution with less weight provided by a top portion and more weight provided by a b members of this panel that different terms mean that they have a different meaning not that they necessarily have to be different structure in the apply to medical eccentric weight portion are two different elements they were different elements but they don't have to be distinct t eccentric distribution of way does not necessarily make it clear portion part of the eccentric weight push right now say that again because i don't know well if you could ha for your son in so much to not know i think i think let me let me go more to the physics of because i think there is a very particular part in me in the specification that might clarify that issue throughout the early specification it talks about the center of gravity are all of the counterweight ok the center of gravity of the pulls the eccentric weight portion to the lowest point the us the center of gravity of the counterweight and insert assembly is closest to the ground and is at the closest point to the ground and equal equilibrium position that can only happen if the eccentric weight is considered with regard to move that center of gravity not not a t for equally all the way around while you're presumably if you can do it perfectly then you won't have a problem but this describes the situation when she cut the teeth then you do not have the equilibrium situation that you tried and yet it says that you remove w just the gear it's the it would seem to me as long as the allocation of weight in the gear portion is symmetrical to the allocation of weight in the what the other side would call the eccentric weight portion i don't see why the equilibrium point would be changed at all well they were there would change right and begin to gear is loaded down here right and the eccentric weight portion is also loaded down here in a way that puts it exactly on the same plane with the extra weight the year or so at that point the eccentric weight or she is not part of the year change as a result of the eccentric weight portion forty three being connected there too so again the weight distribution is as a result of that  which the previous sentence says extends from the face now we were talking earlier about the fact that the theory itself could have an eccentric distribution of  manifest a manifest exclusion or restriction that it represents a clear disavowal all of the eccentric weight being something other then all of the eccentric what ok now in this context there are several places in the patent that talk about the eccentric weight portion position it's the solid metal inserts mounted there and to increase the mass of the eccentric weight portion and to position the center of gravity of the counterweight radially outward from the rotation the ok is talking about the eccentric weight with the inserts positioning the center of gravity of the counterweight not just the eccentric with pollution but the high speeds about its rotational axis were the eccentric weight portions of the two counterweight to generate large vertical or large don't doesn't matter when they do it now or so at some point your argument but i want to hear your argument as to the application of claim sixteen to the early  that the california court look to claim sixteen and decided first they went through the claim differentiation and they said that claim one thousand requires in a goal claim sixteen connected to must applies to the early model five hundred the court found one in california that the insert seeming areas extends fully through both the eccentric weight portion which she did find to be the portion extending for from the face of the gear portion and through the peer forcing where the insert that has a higher melting temperature and greater extends into this eccentric weight portion and as far as i can see it the limitation rid of sacred claim that so but what the california court having insert receiving areas i've got that extending fully through the year portion and fully through the eccentric weight pushing forty three that is correct and that was all that i could see that the district court relied on as a basis rejected the pending claims all of them except for the method claims including the connected  which was discussed in the breeze the petty response of this rejection made the distinction that the invention not the people use the term interval but that the one piece and i think that it's really a shame connected to has to mean anything in that case based on their disclaimer based on the disclaimer that they did yes not in the ordinary course not in the course of without that statement without having to get around or interested in making that admission to it in order to get that happened and to let the people in the public know what they gave up to get around for a scene it would have been able to integral means formed or cast with one piece correct but what i understood you to be saying with respect to clean sixteen is that the  early model one maybe two and there's a more significant the later model that was done in one nine hundred ninety eight and the one or two that might have been made during that time believe there's one  california was used within the six years going back to it but more significant is the later later models ok going back to the eccentric w prosecution to arrive at a proper construction for the claim they did so were eccentric weight portion and as we discussed before as the poem as it was arguing the specification makes it very clear that the  placed in the gear portion for the later models just three upside not but not for the early five hundred that's why we have an issue respect there and for the early models that the only distinction other distinction well that's a slight distinction is is the number of that extends into the eccentric way fortune other than early model and to that it is integral that this not integral that we have a two piece ball to construction that is not contemplated patent so yes the two piece might be more difficult to make or might have had some other engineering aspects to it to enable it to be whole together in such a way that it can function as a one piece it the argument was that the eccentric weight portion and the insert could not be the same thing in other words horenstein did not have an eccentric weight portion