my next case this morning is number sixteen days fifteen seventy nine the plus chico's f a s in courses clear mr dix possible i'm sorry or europe trying to appeal the denial of summary judgment on your infringement theory you can appeal the denial of summary judgment it depends on how the court rules on invent johnson was the inventor she changed it to january fifteenth if we agree with the district court that john so as they have that are what is left in this case for us than i thought i'd so if the court of agrees jonson's and inventor there's still the issue of whether canadian law governs the contract the contract there is still that issue after her inventor ship where the court took the contract that was signed in canada and determined under this contract where they're inventor and she didn't invent it i'm trying to figure out what at the infringement and validity things you think are left that we have to decide if if we think she was right on one johnson was a mentor and retained her right i would still think you because he is under the district court's decision one of the inventors yes and that you do that x is a patient a is critical with regard i hate to bring it back to inventor ship again but the clarifier johnson in may two thousand and seven and october two thousand and seven sexual started working on it they went back and forth between october i'm sorry i don't understand the relationship between these two january date contour block and a priority date of january fifteenth two thousand and eight at the earliest for the invention of sort of the facts that vision so the judge moved the date of invention i don't know what there is i mean johnson's testimony of and it is that she added all these things that are part of the claims of what parent that the didn't even seem to show up in the patent at all putting a tablet between two parts  clear said from day one i want something like a tank top overall clearly the tank top covers the entire block covers the car i don't think it's clear at all right i understand it what the district court said was th the fabric between the two columns and the shape of the feet where is the design pattern shows the fabric going all across and and we have a drawing by johnson showing that goes all the way across and that that was one of her contributions that inserted first more than it was made by a different brahmana factor in jobs clear first took the tank top and bright idea to a prior bra sixty one of the johnson's deposition if you recall i said that they started actually working on the design version one version to version three picks sixty one line fourteen you'll say you'll see the full version b then somewhere between december fifteenth in january fifteenth i had made the decision that i didn't like i didn't like i was going to go to production somewhere with the christmas holidays i would have created the full can mean with the fabric going to the site so clara created the tank top all the way over rather than the insert not about the the fact that the tank top goes over the entire brock conceives of the concept of but this doesn't say anything about what she told her to do with the testimony from this johnson is that she's the one that came up with the idea you know the testimony your honor i would assert is that mrs johnson was answering to clear who hired a contractor if i hire a contractor the contractor doesn't so i'll show you one when i'm up to something in the record where claire says i told mr johnson to put the fabric across the entire brawl i believe or declaration says that your honor and i believe that her instructions in her deposition testimony to johnson saying that i want the tank top over the bra up covers have a relatively straightforward case really turns on testimony directly from the named inventor and that's wrong going to start them started appendix eight thirty for the record there was testimony from dismissed with prejudice really based on and one thirty eight and a follow on to that was at one forty where she dismissed of the claims with respect to infringement invalid what about cardinal chemical which seems to say the words a finding of no infringement you can still go on thank you still have to go on and sign the i'm going to question even while i'm i apologize for not just reading the part of the first time so i would direct the court's attention to appendix eight thirty nine forty nine where clara generally speaks about the conception a century asks the question and presumably you were ten times over bras long before them right answered yes were you trying to did you try to modify strike that in two thousand and five did you try to create a garment in combination with a tank top and bra i agree it's vague she goes on to clarify yes but i wanted to be short not long like a tank top so it was it wasn't just attached but it was in it up that was the point bra maker started converting her tain't top overall brought to load him she was obviously not satisfied with the panel and went to johnson and continued working with johnson draw most most of two thousand seven and beginning of two thousand a day until johnson created ultimately designed that job that claire wanted which was pulling the fabric up over the cleanly cleavage to get the coverage she needed plus the manufacturing remember clear one and several sizes of her bra she wanted to create her own line and manufacturing johnson did nothing more than take prior art apply it to claire's idea it's fair to assume she means under the bra she wouldn't pin it to a shirt well she didn't even know in her deposition where she penned well that in your honor that's a question of fact with the jury believes how can it be a question of fact when because the next paragraph after that goes that it talks about the prototype she created with the other guy and the between and what i believe corroborate claire's testimony is she wasn't done with the other guy if the if the insert of the drugs are such a great idea if that was the idea or what she was stuck with why would she continue hiring people i mean that's just a practical question if if the insert was her idea she would have been done and