process nor are they merely automating or somehow accelerating any existing no method rather these methods claim the use of a new infrastructure for practicing pharmacy new what's new the arrangement of the hardware and the way in which you but there's no new hardware right you're using a computer for some kind of internet or computer network with a camera well the camera is not new the computer is a workstation themselves are not new when i don't presume to have invented the internet there is some custom verification software in there we do submit that does what you're claiming what we're claiming is a specific arrangement of that hardware with verification software that's notably distributed and quite specific in that the verification software is hosted at the institutional pharmacy workstations accessible from via a website in claim one and via other means and other claims from the remote site in a workstation and there we submit we should not have to reinvent a computer in order to have a usage of a computer that eligible essentially because they are merely automating or accelerating would be the use of standard computer technology practices that were no routine and conventional in the field this is not such a case we have overwhelming evidence practices were not known at all and the practice of having a pharmacist certify the work of a non pharmacist wasn't a known business method i mean it sounds like it was not only known but it was required by state law  pharmacy board explains that is insight into programs or on site in person i read supervision the idea of remotely supervising that process when the pharmacist is unavailable is a new concept it was deemed innovative by the texas pharmacy board caused a rule change as a result of that so this is not simply taking the idea of supervision of verification in automating it this is creating an entirely new infrastructure that hadn't been done before and like saying entirely new infrastructure but the infrastructure you're talking about it's completely conventional pieces it's a camera it's the internet it's a computer well again we do also have custom verification software but you're i was referring elements individually well let me ask you that because you keep saying custom verification software too is that what your claims are directed towards custom verification software not entirely that is one significant element point to point that to me and your claims you as software may it seems to be the pack eligible is that the specific you prevent in computer technology but i don't see that that's what you're claiming well known conventional practice and really i think that's one of the most fundamental problems with the judgement here the procedural posture of this case the procedural posture of this case was result on s the only evidence offered by baxter to show what this sort of what was known in this field what was done in this field is the texas code at best the texas code shows that in two thousand and one for the first time certain limited  tell a pharmacy activities work permit those limited tell pharmacy active before you go out because it doesn't seem like you're taking me up on my taishan to show where you're claiming software and i just assume you're not i don't have claim to limit specifically to this new verification software that you're talking about you're claiming the whole order method is that right we are but the software is an integral part of that because we claim the verify are there any claims that are specifically your brief or in the specification or in the district court about the content of the verification software element of the claim the content in terms of what would what is it what is verification the implementing verification software are facilitated by that verification software and the verification software is noted that it's via one of more computers at the institutional pharmacy so we have sort of a hosted software system there that is facilitating the rest of the entire method so the transmission of the images the storing of the images on the website the ability for the remote pharmacist to access those images all of those and then eventually to verify  indication but again it was anything new about the software i mean it's i see what it's doing but is that i mean hasn't there been software that's been doing that the past was maybe in a different setting but conveying these items well there's no evidence in the record of any software that was doing all of these particular steps again the only evidence that we have offered by baxter and again the summary judgment baxter's the only evidence that we have is what the two thousand and one code contemplated which didn't include all of the steps here were directed to the context in the specific types of infrastructure to capture the information not sterile compound ing didn't involve the indication from the pharmacist and the pair and the corresponding indication at the institutional pharmacy so i wouldn't say that on this record there's anything to show that this software is somehow old  pharmacist site may be connected over the internet via a custom protocol for viewing remote pharmacy work such as may be implemented by remote verification software so that's one example a second example occurs i believe it's  fifteen which reads quote custom software such as remote verification software configured specifically for communication and that exchange as part of remote verification of pharmacy functions may provide a user interface for uploading  reviewing to make historically is it so for the two things that you've pointed out sure read to me as though it's pointing to something old it's a reference to use verification software the skilled reader would know what that is it must be an existence we transaction of information verifications it was something that would have to be implemented so that the system could function as the claims require put you directed our tension to the bottom of column fourteen the top of com fifteen and it says remote verification software configured specifically for communication and data exchange as part of remote verification of pharmacy functions etc and what's what sort of picking up maybe on what judge serrano was saying what is new about that i mean that's just software in the familiar communication internet scenario well i guess if we're taking each each thing that this software can accomplish transmitting information we're not purporting to prevented transmitting information we're not purporting to inventive receiving information but the verification software does a lot of steps all together that are that are what is described in what you've been talking about well yes i think i think woodward and i mean my rebuttal times i'd like that like to be brief about this but i think what has to be done that's that's more is to essentially direct their plans to something other than a purported abstract idea here the district court concluded that supervision verification was the direction that the claims or the focus of the claims that we have here is well isn't that pretty reasonable considering claim one it's a method for remote supervision and verification  pharmacy functions well but the remote aspect is really the crux of the matter that is the entire purpose of this inventions what makes it a solution to a problem and why the texas board said it was innovative and when we're looking at individual elements of the district court is going to have a lot of computerization and a real work things that are innovative and useful and can make a lot of money that still are pattern eligible because there computerizing a business method well but again your own i think the computerizing of a business method that the idea of something like that failing under prong two has been because the practice itself was just a routine well known conventional function looking at the ordered combination of all of these steps together it's very clear on this record that it had never been done that this was the first time that this inventors actually created this infrastructure for it to be done and between the evidence in the code itself the evidence from dr anderson at a very bare minimum with this factual question of what was well known what was conventional what was but what makes it not abstract here is that it's being applied in this pharmacy pharmacist review situation but if it's more than that your honor these claims like tapes are very specific to the extent they're directed the supervision of verification this is a very specific application of that idea and implementation of it to solve a specific problem it's not just that it's limited to sterile compound it's limited to reviewing non pharmacist work at a  between the process of just sterile compound ing and the process of making a sterile compound a drug that's acceptable for at for being given to a patient and the result of this process is not just the drug but if verified drug that's appropriate to be placed into pharmacy stuff played even mention of that  specification indicating that the inventor came up with a new form of software to perform any type of pharmacy functions you i think were quoting or paraphrasing column nine is it my mind like i think it's line forty six sure are line forty five to be more specific is that the same it says off the shelf video conferencing and or collaboration software is that the pharmacy work feel it via a real time cooperation tool and then it talks about that tool being software moreover your honor in the district court where the lower court asked what was it that the concrete about one of the things that for example verification software doesn't do it's not performing any mathematical algorithms or checking any chemical or pharmaceutical  doing that those functions are no we're describing claims or the specification so again i think with the software does based on the claims is so what if you i hypothetically had software that kind of you had a specific kind of table set up where the software could determine how much of a certain ingredient how much of a certain thing you took out or how many pills or something like that and it independently apart from the video stream would let the pharmacists know that they're there putting the pills together or making proper composition and it describes specifically this software will you know w specification it sounds like it would be but that's not part of the specification or the claims at the just record during play construction are you that the algorithm for the software was there's nothing in the claim that shows that any new software was invented as opposed to simply software that transmits data now council refer to the customer software but the customize would do you understand you just made a distinction so you must understand something about the term customized well i'm it's in your mind about that we should probably look at what's in the specification rather so the specification in that column in that the software transmitted state of the data is either visual data the picture or video or some sort of verification data that the pharmacists had in fact approved the process but there is no so your arse the bottom line in this case is in the background of the invention of the panty indicated the supervision in verification of pharmacy functions including sterile compound and were required in long required the remote aspect is implemented through as best occasion says off the shelf computers  the shelf computer networks and off the shelf of conventional software all performing their expected functions this is a classic case where else would apply your iris if you have no other questions that's my presentation thank you thank you  software refers to video conferencing and our collaboration software that is referenced very separately and apart from what's described elsewhere in the specification has the custom verification software for facilitating other of the claim functions and ravenously focused on like this recorded individual steps which is only one part of alice a step to the order combination of all of this together is a process to me that was not done in pharmacy it was actually not done there's nothing in the record that this kind of remote supervision verification was done in any other field there are some examples of lawyers need to be supervising their subordinates teachers need to be supervised and so forth none of that shows and use of most supervision or ve tion so on this record there really is a dearth of evidence on the part of baxter despite it being its birth and furthermore as i mentioned before the two thousand and one comes the first time that certain limited non sterile compounding functions were even permitted in that state but let's take a step back and look at what the quality of this evidence is we're talking about one statute from one state only a few years before this application was filed now that statute doesn't even teach or suggest or indicate what is in these claims but even if it did that cannot rise to the level of showing a well known routine and understood practice when these when the court consider what is a well known routine understood we're looking for something some sort of proof that it's been done for a long time some sort of proof from an authoritative source of what's been done in a widespread way here the two thousand one code shows a few limited tel pharmacy activities that have nothing to do with the actual process of sterile compound ing but only looking at the finished drug and seeing if it's the right medication being handed up to the patient that's a far cry from what these claims cover and again on this posture th record was supposed to give that in dickinson the benefit of viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to betting dickinson on that factual question what was well known what was routine the order combination of all of these steps together of all the components put together all the verification software does all the human interaction on both sides with this system that was not shown to be conventional it was baxter's burden to show that this record was supposed to credit our evidence with any benefits of the doubt and a bare