to please the court i think i'm going to be brief for now since we just addressed a lot of the claim construction issues in the last session but i did want to point out just a couple things one of these we fleshed out in our a pattern all of the claims require using a certain key to encrypt in the crypt the preferences file all of the one nine one patent claims talk about locating the preference file and we talked earlier in the last  session about our view that located in the context of the specification means to locate something that is hidden now in terms of how the board's decision for how boards construction affected its decision we think that's undeniable if you read the boards analysis for how it went through and identified why it believed the patent claims were invalid in light of the prior art of record  if we think for one that totally eviscerates the idea that the preferences file needs to be secured also when the board actually goes through its analysis of the independent file the same way as retrieving the preferences file well the patent separately uses the terms retrieve and locate and of course present tells us that when different claim terms are used their presumed to me different things are suggested here is that locate means locate a file whose storage location for lack of a better term is not known without the additional data  in particular the board rely the dictionary to put the hidden meaning here proposed construction it hidden would mean that the location of file if i go to one of these you know public storage places locate locker six thirty seven so i still actually have to go locate it but i'm going to guess it's not hidden in some senses so i started thinking what is the sense in which you were asking the board to construe the claim we're asking that could mean that there have to has to be other information that you were given before you can locate that in your particular analogy i think you said locker six thirty six or something you have that sometimes you need one of these maps like a treasure hunt to read how many times he turned left and right exactly you may have a map you may have a lot remember the example from the briefing was locating a term in indiction ary first of all that that's not located as it's used in the patent but if you're locating a term in a dictionary as we mentioned you have certain context you know how thick the dictionary is you know it's in alphabetical order you know that if you're looking for a term that starts with m it's going to be roughly in the middle i mean your so you have information ahead of time that you can use to find the location that's what we mean by there is that it requires additional information before you can locate  instance the supports the dictionary definition the board's definition two one of the dictionaries on appendix six eighty nine another acceptable definition for locate there was to find or fix the place u file and so there was no basis if the court had applied that construction to invalidate the claims are based on the prior art record i know we've gone on a lot of these issues in the last session i'm happy to answer any questions the board has otherwise i believe our discussion during the c m discussion applies here i'm happy to respond to my rebuttal time to any additional points completely understand the or even reply but i think the argument is something along the lines of because the preferences files hidden the authenticity of the must located or dangerous location both of those predicates are wrong as a back to them but also encrypted files and our expert and their expert dr katz conceded that those are not hidden they're encrypted which is a different form of security but they're not hidden in any way so the argument t may be is a question more about what they mean but i guess the question is what is the question about what they explained hidden is it in some sense an encrypted file is hidden now where it is everything except its shell is hidden in some sense is that the file is not readily know so that would be that spot on the wall or is obscured that also could be that spot of the wall with the curtain funded by the encrypted file which their own expert admits it's not hidden its location is not obscured in any way its location is readily known as post not readily known has a different type of security it's encrypted but it's not hidden in any way and i think that that that preference is filed be hidden nor is there any requirement that they did there be some sort of security on the preferences file it water for the claim to be satisfied key must i and i'm not sure if i'm articulating it correctly below it was the authenticity he must provide the ability to locate the preference file they are fifteen and twenty one the board described how why files did need to be hidden while why the preferences key supposed to be off and authentication key locates a preferences file then it two twenty eight and twenty nine where he said as a matter of logic and fact one of the ordinary skill in the art would understand that if you're going to retrieve something from a file you have to locate it first and what dr tiger said in both does not then play a role in the performance of the routine to find the preference key at i think ninety eight percent correct the only place i would change it is that the authentication she does that necessarily have to play a role i don't think that the board authenticity does does your honor suggested provide the predicate the condition for it the preference is key to locate the preferences file but it need not do it itself or do it directly and ultimately the question of whether the board thank your art briefly i think there is there's at least some stated confusion about our position and whether whether it works because we're contending that the preferences file has to be hidden and i know the statements were made the argument was made that there are embodiments disclosed where and the experts agreed that the preferences file may be encrypted and need not be hit and that's used the word locate and locate as we've said in the context the specification means to find something find something to use location is not known without the information that you're painting and icity key to move to the funding routine and that routine doesn't have to itself make use of the authenticity it makes use of other things that's a way of sounds like a known then that's an ask that is at least a measure of security there similarly if the file is encrypted and you have to have the preferences key to decrypt the file that's an aspect of security here as well so i the need for of authenticity that allows you to look to a routine under which you get a preference is key if that if you have a system like that is if and you can find the file with have that all inclusive th automatically mean that it's hidden i'm sorry quite follow i'm sure i'm trying to understand both the meaning of hidden and the relation between hidden which is your proposed term and the and it was pointed out in the briefing that the district court in claimed destruction said the preferences directly locates a preferences file i think that would satisfy that need to where it is providing the ability to  locate the file if you're talking about just as a precondition to i guess it depends on what precondition means if you're talking about receiving the authenticity and retrieving it out of the format it data if that is the precondition but then you toss it aside i think that there could potentially be a situation where you can toss it aside and not use that directly in the location but i think the locate still means something has to locate the preferences file and it has to be in an obscure location at that point or have that answers the question  we talked earlier about the board's failure to address the claim limitations and the argued was brought up earlier that no the board didn't do that it found exactly where the prior art identify where the authenticity stamp was retrieved from a preferences file that in all of those situations there was no suggestion that the preferences file was anywhere other than in the hand readily available and our point in that argument was that by saying that the elements to enable the authenticity key to be retrieved from the formatted data into locate a preferences file board simply said we disagree that this has to be hidden and then they basically skip to the next step and said when you take the authenticity stamp out of the print out of the preferences file you've satisfied these elements and that's why we said that there had been  second case i think in that situation if you reverse the c p m eligibility finding you don't reach the question of the merits in the first case first but you would need to decide the merits one way or another hopefully reversing claims for twenty four are held to be properly cancelled that leaves claimed before the do you have a stake in our deciding that i think we do have a stake in deciding i believe there are still licensees who pay licenses on the patent based on whether there is or is not a valid claim to live still in the patent for instance i can tell you i don't believe that claim twenty fourth's currently being asserted but what effect does that have on this case happens in that case obviously there are more claims that issue here so there's at least some interest in reaching a decision we like that we'd like everything to be overturned and none of it to be affirm so that's my short answer to that but certainly the court has discretion to rule the cases as it chooses thank you mr right they should be taken a number of hours