pressure now the district court opinion which appears in the appendix at eight zero zero one zero nine dash one eleven that part of the opinion the district court simply found that if a surgeon practices the method and the question is whether the two subsequent happens which claim inventions involving one pair of crude are intitled to the look at the entire disclosure of the nine seventeen application each and every time they talk about the number of holes in the head they used the phrase at least two or was this is in the summary bench and it's in  the detail description of the invention it's all the relevant drawings that show two balls that these two holes in the abstract i submit your honor that the district courts to conclusion that two holes was not in a row is directly contradicted by the phrase at least one when they want to and the second ball being optional that's not what they said you know at least that would certainly be true if this were claim language and i think you'd have a very powerful argument but this is the we're talking about what was disclosed and therefore i would assume that refuse normally and that it is in addition it has probably twelve if you careen those two sets then something that only has one set of headlights would be covered but if it's not clear to me that you haven't disclosed says it doesn't say too that would probably be true of the disclosure simply said to boles it says at least two oars and there was a reason for that because as we pointed out in their briefs the statement one of the stated objectives of this device was to be a universal had to have the second anchoring means going through the second hole that was indicated there are other fractures it is true there are other fractures which did not require the second school of the second inquiry means but if you were going to have a universal on the spot that's why it had to have two holes that's what they talked about and that was the whole objective of this particular vision was to have a universal device a device that could be available to treat all these different types of fractures agreed that he didn't need t thing the judge the judge got into this concept of a species genius situation and he cited this case because bill status is what all of us i believe for the proposition that you can't have one species can support a genius least two at least two would support a genus that includes what the words of the proposition make sense but not with correct i'm sorry in other words his statement of law may be correct but it's irrelevant in this case that your argument scope of the injunction and the effect of getting rid of it if we were to reverse for example on the four of six and we'll see how that affects practically right but this is that is apart from the underlying substantive issue of whether induced it should be if i understand that but i let me put it this way you wouldn't be thrilled to walk away from here i take it with nothing other than winning on the is ever do with a patent before the incident before the actual scheme is the most importantly there is absolutely no evidence showing that said it's engaged intentional culpable conduct that actively encourage doctors to use active focuses on the ability to treat a variety of fractures and says the object of the invention is marrying the benefits of an imaginary ride with a proven benefits of this compression gets to systems which allow the so called sliding  thirty one a compression of spirit this kind of one screw device was directly what he sought to marry with an imaginary rod and in the opening abstract and other places pointed to the specification you no more universal device that is capable of treating a neck fracture and controlling rotation then you might want the ability to take advantage of the option of having a second screw which necessarily means a second pair of holes through the you have a pair of holes because of the two penetrations from the rod or a single screw those a second pair of holes is required for a second springs than the pressure in the head of the rock and all the other fracture conditions that are also addressed in the specification the witness testimony i would support relies upon in these fact findings said one can treat a great variety of fractures and it was known in the orthopedic community it would have been the one skilled in the art looking  t was disclosed in the nine one seven that you could have a device that would treat a variety of fractures and since you would not be concerned about a neck fracture rotational control you would not need to every use a second screw and therefore would not  have one screw because you are not interested in marketing it for the additional optional use that would require a second pair of scruples and if that testimony was there the minutes were originally presented in the two seventeen foot tellings directed to one disclosure that one of ordinary skill in the art would proceed to include a device it was capable of treating and why variety fractures neck fracture being virtually the only one it would treat without needing an optional second screw and therefore without a second parables the head was in fact inherently present and was in fact disclosed in the disclosures which talk about advice that has at least a scream and imaginary rod and it appears both in the abstract and and the abstract which between perceives it says a screwed so there were conflicting points in the specification you have a trial judge who did what i think he was supposed to do he listened to all the testimony of witnesses about what one of ordinary skill in the art would and they said these witnesses mr hall describe we put in evidence of the total sales of the product mr hall testified this device was intended to fill all of our product line because we didn't have an inner tracking terror fractures we put in evidence that most of the factors that are going to be treated with this kind of device are going to be know he did not make that specific finding it's obvious from the court's injunction and what he said when said these asked him to modify and he said wait a minute you have taught the medical community to use this device to treat in the record that said these was out teaching surgical community exactly the steps in the method this is one of these things where you know there's a word here word there and maybe somebody could put this together in friendship matter every step is set for th simply don't read it that way i think the judge had to found some activity in the past in order to think that there was anything wrong full to enjoy and when he said since he says taught the medical community this method he was making the finding on the ultimate issue of inducement that is how they induce the surgeons to go out have their sales reps show them the procedures given these technique guides make the specially tooling and then sell multimillion dollars worth of a product intended primarily for interrupt eric tractors and which has a critical feature the ability some way if something happens or if you needed one sure in their working on a patient to have active compression they i want to make sure that i understand where you are on what was the requirement of proof to support the injunction and you are you do you believe that you had an obligation to show that there was some actual inducement of actual infringement before the judge could enter an injunction or is it sufficient simply to show that there was a risk of  principle i believe that we there were two didn't show actual ok i understand is what i'm asking you whether assuming i don't agree with you that that you actually showed that there was even a single and you say if we look at testimony that we see a crime sorry turns testimony and holes testimony we will find actual evidence reciting that this has been practiced and if you list matt the sales numbers exhibit and couple that with the testimony that this is primarily a device for interpreting terror fractures a reasonable inference is this device has been used by water were surgeons prior to this trial to treat strengthen the head something that can be accomplished where ever there are walls are found and it's undisputed it has their balls generally uniform introduced to overcome reno and it's clear that was talking about the length of it in a stand that otherwise had dinner rolls on the just indicated it has many other  treating various types of fractures a technique guide and page twenty six has one paragraph that talks about active depression one sentence it tells you how to use active compression by turning the buffers compression but it doesn't teach you will it should be used it certainly doesn't