that's not the issue what we're talking about here is the trial ground when you come in and say the control means excuse me that reproducing means requires a controller in a sense the size or  prior that was the petition that's that's what the board said or there's as your position that if if we thought that they were properly instituted or at least that that's not appealable that you are not contesting the board stated that well we understand this prior art mapping which was only pointing to a c p u as actually pointing to a structure even though the the petitioner never pointed to such structure even in greed that it decision j one seventy seven they said ok we've seen the preliminary response coming from sony we've seen that they've argued that the algorithms column seven lines fifty eight quality lines ten figure eight we agree with that that's that's the  proper construction and from there they work backwards through the petition sites to say well the petitioner must have meant this and they must have been pointing to this fall for this algorithm but they never did any of that they never explained in the petition well what is it that makes the algorithm in these references equivalent to the algorithm in the specification so the board said well if you if you look at this algorithm it's judging it's selecting and then at the end was and then at the end of the trial the board allowed the petition of the come in and what the petitioner said is well i'm going to put my ground in the terms of the board so this is what the board said the ground should be so now in in my in my reply i'm going to provide a new claim chart we're now i'm talking about algorithms for the first time now i'm talking about figure eight for the first time and we have judged it so that we argue that it was a process but when the board about what happened here well you seem to be arguing that this construe the algorithm or construed differently and you have proposed that it be construed and what i'm trying to get is what's the difference thank art is the user experience in other words i'm holding down the remote control button i lift my finger off what happens on the television and nowhere was there any discussion of how the c p u in the prior art operates in other words how was this process down how was the tuning done where is the end help to me where is the steps in figure eight as eleven through s seventeen they talk about us eleven they talk about a seventy to institution but they don't identify where any of that was necessarily mean that it's part of the software well why there's an analogous function there for sure in that the remote control operation work the same way but how the c p u implements that that's where the structur is what's in that portion of the specification is what's in figure eight and so what the board said institution as well we see this in the prior art and what we said re hearing as well but what you're pointing to is not a except you out of rhythm you're pointing to a common functionality yes the remote control may operate the same way but how does the c p u perform that processing that's what's important so we got all the way through trial and then the petitioner tried to adapt their grounds to the board's essentially the board's view of the grounds provided it a new claim charge but even still there it was just pointing to the user experience it wasn't explaining how the c p u was looking up in  whole discussion of s seventeen was raised for the first time by petitioner at the oral hearing because it occurred to them that at this j one seventy seven which is the institution decision oh the board listed as seventeen as part of the algorithm there's really no discussion of that in the record they tried to bring in an oral argument that put up a demonstrative they circled in red as seventeen that was nowhere in the briefing we can address that unless we're presented with it and then on appeal the solicitor says well you know you could discern where the board was going on that because mpeg is discussed in other contexts in other areas for different claim terms as patent or we can't be left guessing as to what the ground is especially a where the board simply excused the fatal error and rewrote the trial or else we need to have that up front that's the petition of burden it wasn't here we can't just look at this algorithm and say well it's simple therefore we don't have to analyze  t and that is what happened so you know just finishing up our reserve the rest of my time father peter cannot rewrite the trial grounds to cover structure that the petitioner affirmatively pointed out in the petition wasn't there they said this is a c p u period part of the petition dealing with this particular limitation and then it also went through the prior are in the exact section of the petition dealing with this limitation stepping back from it the algorithm here is a very simple one it is controlling it could to control or function so as controlling the components described in the other limitations so that they only receive the t v signal limitation is incorporates a bunch of other limitations register controlling for these other limitations so it controls the transmission of transmission signal receiving meetings so that's the limitation when the first limitation to receive a channel which is what that limitation does any given by the channel number being displayed which is also in other limitations when and why and us says it's all just controlling these things that exist otherwise to to display that channel when their command received by the command receiving means to program so was a command receiving means that is also another limitation which is limitation one being which is for receiving a command fro limitation is done so referenced and by this claim which is another part of the of the invention which is that there are the numbers of the channel are only displayed a changing and not the channel  that's in the mid table when any so in that says until that operation of the channel selection is discontinued by the user so that's when the user takes the finger off so that the by defining it in that way or looking off is already described in all the other means on how that works with the system to tell the system ok if it's if it's if the fingers  and keep going and if the fingers off receive channel looking about us i mean i think that there are my friend here mentioned some of the other steps and i think it's worth looking at is the channel key still being pushed and if it's if eight if it is finished then you go to the channel selection process in which just step as seventeen to tell the transmission single receiving means to go ahead and do it  then the next steps are actually receiving or the next steps of of searching for the channel with that and just displaying it without receiving it but the other petition and the board covered those steps as well because what's really going on here that would take a long time it's going through channels so i had the same problem in l of systems it was not so much of a delay is an additional system because you don't have to wait for every other compressed packets to be uncompressed and and for that to be covered the bases that if you want to view it more broadly i was actually including those steps and doing not just going to a seventeen and saying do you thing but also including all the process steps into a seventeen that that is also taught that would receive these then heck streams would include decoding and using that of the channel tables including this conditional access table to be able to to be able to actually see the program as fourteen s fifteen et s thirteen are included in the algorithm i don't see that anywhere but i can but the board covered them and that makes sense because for they've covered limitation then when the which is where the channel number being switched are displayed without displaying a channel selection until the operation of the channel selection has discontinued about the user so the board covered all that in one knee and they didn't have any objection to that all these limitations were and disputed but the board did also address s twelve and fourteen and fifteen and as a thirteen when it was discussing the team in rosenberg because each of the parts of the human rosenberger the just say what this is doing is just that they do that the channels are changed up or down while only the number is being displayed so that's that set of limitations and the board those were in the petition as is well in the petition just to be clear here the algorithm that the for the light upon was figure eight and the description of figure eight in the columns that i said earlier that includes the entirety of figure eight what i heard here today is that the key  then you need to make that showing because that's what we have to rebut especially when none of this was in the petition and this is a creation of the board there's also a lot of discussion about mpeg process it's not in the record there is a discussion the board said that this was the algorithm in figure eight and they cited to the column that describes the entirety of figure eight you can't just dismiss it and say it's simple the board did at oral argument say that they're the same and that's because they