reveals is a is a factual question right right that's correct so we have to find that there's no substantial evidence to support the board's conclusion that marshawn showed what the child that's right ok presumably the parties dispute whe you have any problem with that general legal concept that makes it a private reference can implicitly disclose something i think if there is substantial evidence to support it i would agree with it i think in this case you'll see that there is not substantial evidence supporting it which is where the dispute ok you spend a lot of time on your fourth but you agree the figure for doesn't disclose all aspects of the mobile phone of marshawn right i agreed it doesn't but it does for purposes of the appeal if it shows the material limitations for the and those that existed in two thousand and one when the over three patent was filed failing to account take into account those differences runs the risk of and impermissible hindsight bias i'm going after enter into what the court actually rel petitioners themselves disclose that you wouldn't be motivated in this instance to use multiple us's and if you look at appendix one fifty six petitioners of experts said that it would be inefficient to use multiple us and you would want to think there was no i'm sorry there's a local that working more sean have to have a laptop it doesn't have to have a laptop it has to the system is a series of devices so if it doesn't have to have a laptop would really tell us be located  and then what happens when it actually invokes the gateway capability to get to the internet and that is why in our in our briefs we talk about two people that and i can explain that but it doesn't have to be on the laptop the instances are disclose our laptop doesn't disclosure that there are many things not expressly prevented in a given reference i think i would agree with that general proposition but there's more to it than that right well i'm sure i do it just talks about different situations where it could have been and and petitioners they pick up on this to provide they say that the passage that i have highlighted you could have had a mere possibility of a third multiple of us again petitioners initially in their petition counseled against using multiple us as they said it should be one either it's on the phone or the laptop not coax secondly the mere possibility again can't reach substantial evidence  from mobile phone dr kai said the mobile phone must also include in the us so we would need to find that that testimony is it's an accurate or not credible right and that is that the instance that i point you on to ninety your here hansing the capabilities of the device in your instance the network would be started with the printer that doesn't have access to the internet directly into the phone to come into a system to be able to do it so that's the focus of marsh on what it devices connected the point of your shyness to get to the internet how do you get to the internet you use and from that has cellular capability so the cellular capability is the functionality that the other devices share and that's what the whole system is meant to do we're saying there's  as you said your are with the devices that you need to service the phone comes in provides a service and then there's another conversation with the separate people now where there's pretty between the phone and the device using the call controls and that's why we argue there's system to provide the car control functionality because the the devices are already connected before that happens there's already some network that's already in place with through bluetooth where devices are connected so we know from blu technology specifications there's already a master kindly master server relationship among those devices the the phone comes in later to provide this whole control functionality and then we have the new master servant relationship when the it's invoked ok we've got a few minutes left her but i will actually restore up to three minutes article i'm trying to picture how this works right and so that in two thousand and one they're talking about here you're not home you've got all this stuff set up on your laptop it solved it's got this whole system set up everybody talks to each other you walk in and boom your phone's automatically connected and so you can you can make a call based on the information that's in the laptop sounds pretty cool but it sounds different than what had been done before so why isn't why why isn't bluetooth technology that says you can only be a master of one pecan at a time so that's why the phone could not start as the master of the or because of that and the us and everyone that everyone has agreed that the master of connect will have the l us the disagreement is who is the master between council so between the parties so because of that it's important to be good to remember that you cannot have a master of two different  the disclosure portions very clear where it even started to eighty six where once the phone functionality is invoked then just prior to the execution of the a p i then you start a new conversation between the phone separate and apart from the i r s it's not in the us it's separate apart from that actually makes sense when you look at the whole disclosure figure for if you go to two eighty five is i'm sorry figure four if you go to two need seven is actually describing what happens when the laptop wants to make a phone call that's actually description what's going to figure four so it completely makes sense that the a p i has been transferred from the phone to the laptop that does have the you know us clear and figure for the  laptop already has the all us then the a b i comes in because it's using that functionality of the phone but the mere existence of a now you asked on a laptop doesn't alter the ability of the the phone to happen now us right master and then the fun becomes the slave trade spawning to the call for sure which was from the computer correct but in my shop the only disclosure is because of i guess the state of time the only way to get to the cellular or more shot is through the phone because that's the only connection to the so your network that the whole point of the call control center that's what you're trying to do so the mobile phone is your only gateway that's why they call it the gateway device because it's your only way to get to the end so it can't be the master box it has to be the master of  individual conversation with the device trying to get to the the last thing to say is that we believe that this case analogous to something recently ruled upon in the first circuit specifically we think this case has been out the facts to do you assess tax versus apple which was decided on march twenty third twenty eight thousand there the court found that the board's analysis was deficient because of found that the knowledge of the skill of arson could supply a missing feature from the