decryption requires digital information p m c made that clear in the claim language in an explicit claim amended fact adding the word digital p m c made that clear in the specification and p m c that tripoli clear in the prosecution history three separate times and three separate statements to the p t o during prosecution disclaiming analog and in particular disclaiming any suggestion that the scrambling was part of the cryptic the board rejected our construction and the board gave a number of reasons responding to the points that i've just alluded to but they really all boil down to two foundational things in the war today that the board came back to again and again one is the propositional phrase at the beginning of the claim one which i was referring to including encrypted information and the other is a statement in the specification which i'd like to come to as well but let me begin in particular with it and say in the st step of claim thirteen including encrypted information and the board said that this shows that although the claim language begins with receiving an encrypted digital information transmission that because the then goes on to use this different phrase encrypted information that therefore a digital information transmission must be able to include non digital information as well because of because that word digital is not repeated  be digital it can't be analog you know felt it yes in fall that's and i think that that's actually made clear by this propositional phrase so it does not have to be all encrypted that is what this propositional phrase is doing it must include encrypted information it may not just include digital information it must be digital information and there remain a dispute between the parties here in this court about whether that opening craze requires the whole transmission to be digital so that we the have asked that question at the hearing what our position was high we got it we made clear that this is not in the appendix it's a page thirty nine of the transcript of the oral hearing which is in the record that that was our construction of it so i do think that there is a dispute between the parties for purposes of this i p r and the board certainly made clear that it disagreed with p m s these construction and came back to it again and again by saying that this that the including encrypted information phrase honor and that's what as we said in our reply brief the word including is it is doing no work in the board's construction and it is doing work in our construction and we think it's doing critical work because it including encrypted information shows that this is a subset as you have to you have to show here that the board's constructions on reasonable right or that it's not consistent with the specification is that yeah i'm thinking about the broadest reasonable interpretation of oh i  one way to look at it is at least it is you know it's supposed to be the broadest but it also has to be reasonable and it also has to be consistent with the specification right do you agree that that's what you've got to show here this  that their construction can't be the broadest reasonable construction in our hours must be but as the as your question said correctly and it is your position that there construction is not reasonable right because precisely because it's not consistent with either the claim  language or the specification or the prosecution history and i think that the gist is just to add to your question the prosecution history including the disclaimers are critical part of this and so a construction that says you know as the as the board did here that it was going to disregard  the including encrypted information would do some of the same work in other words that that would would what i guess my question is why wouldn't it do all the work and i'd add that i'm not suggesting this is the sponsorship from me but we have a language question we have a spec question we have a prosecution history question we so far been talking about the language and the language originated in a kind of well and suspenders way so it would have an explanation but just on the text i think just on the text if this had been what it said all along we might have a surplusage argument but i think you as your last question alluded to this these two words encrypted digital rights to the encrypt additional information transmission two words were added during prosecution as a belt and suspenders way of ensuring to the examiner that is that textual matter i guess i'm not hearing an explanation of how this claim language would be any different if that phrase specifies that you need encryption and you need digital and you need you need the other element as well you need for me information that is transmitted and then the nd phrase specifies that the encryption can be partial it must include encrypted information it's  maybe not the most artful way because giving giving a fact but as we've just been discussing because it was done in this belt and suspenders way to insure that digital was going to be a limitation and  description of encryption to some to suggest that it could be digital only i think you got that argument in there direct and then ah so you've got some prosecution history from the two the st two responses to the office actions are before the amendment to a digital there's there was a prosecution history statements there those are the things you're relying on and then in conjunction with the amendment there is a and explanatory statement that doesn't just explain the amendment it explains there the the example seven is concluded and the specification is explaining ways in which example seven might be modified and then there are those as a number of examples the rd example which begins at page fifty up at line fifty seven is the line to which your question judge stole alluded and that the work relied on it says that the that the wall street transmission may be of conventional analog television meaning instead of the digital television that example seven is made  a matter of the lexicographic this pattern we read that is saying that just as the digital transmission that we just told you about it i believe it's column one hundred and forty eight the beginning of example seven may instead be analog that descriptor is that we've told you about something on the same expressed lexicography in your specification and then you also have this passage here that we've just been talking about which in all to me detracts from the idea that your own lexicographer and i just want to give you an opportunity to respond sure and to be clear that we think that even if you disagreed with our lexicography argument we still think that we would win based on the claim language based on the use say we know that the degree the thing that has to be decrypted is programming so if we were advocating for a definition that was we didn't fit with programming at all ok i could i could see that point but the analogy that we gave in our brief is that if we talk about winding a watch a watch can be analog a watch can be digital but only one kind of watch can be wound and the fact that it's winding a watch wouldn't change the meaning of the word winding and i would just add to that the fact that the programming appears in the preamble the preamble is not limiting it what the the view not necessarily that encryption is limited to digital but the language of digital information transmission and might have that rant encrypted digital information transmission that is limited to entire spec but merely to enable you to understand which of several possible beyond that i'll address but if i could just address that foundational piece of this i believe there is a common ordinary meaning that was the starting point as i was pointing out the prior are talking about here that was found going to say by the or use the terms in groups and decryption to refer to systems that were processing at least in part analog information sorry i just know that was the common usage at the time and so i would suggest that the only way the paulson where or in that case there was a question of what the term computer mess and it said well there's no rigid in fixed meaning of computer but there's sort of a corner standing that is something that is getting a device that engages in calculations and the question was find that because i don't think the board found i think the board did find that the core the common meaning in this is appendix i think thirty two is the common meaning understood at the time was that it was something humans to decipher scramble better off using a algorithm or other digital information and so that was sort of the core understanding it and then the question is is it exclusively digital as p m c argues or kind of exclude analog components and so with that cont think we look at the prosecution as free and what they are what they're arguing here are essentially claim construction type arguments clearly they're trying to argue that the claim construction of encryption decryption should require a digital signal and allow me to get back to that in a minute if even if there was a disclaimer what that disclaimer might be there making that argument but then clearly here in the december two thousand and eleven prosecution history back and forth there pivoting from that and saying well we acknowledge that it can be argued that mason teachers encrypted elements and so the question here is is is the term encrypted because of the issue that is being raised here is do those terms exclusively require an exclusive digital processing with fully legal entire word you see that the next sentence but it does not teach the encrypt of an entire digital signal transmission times up from the bottom of twenty three t so i guess let me let me take a step back to when we're now talking about the phrase in the claim for receiving encrypted additional information transmission including encrypted information that's something the board  has adopted a claim construction it was challenged on rehearing by p m c and they did not challenge it here so we have a construction of that phrase that is binding on this court they waive the ability to argue about that we're simply now arguing about encrypted and encrypted separate and apart from that phrase and the board found that with respect to his appendix twenty one and encrypted digital information transmission including encrypted information includes at least some encrypted digital information and does not preclude with that transmission and corrupted information or scrambled scrambled analog information so we're not looking at that entire phrase when the issue the p m c is raised here on appeal we're simply looking at the corruption and the corruption and with respect to those phrases at most we can glean from the prosecution history that it requires a digital signal now let's think about what the board found in terms of the purchase decryption again there's a there's two questions with respect to what needs to be digital one for the payload the digital information the content the programming and then secondly you have a template an algorithm or other digital information on that nd piece the board didn't read any digital requirement and the all of the prior art at the border a lot of money has that digital he has part of it the question is does the programming the content the information need to be explicitly does or not and nothing in the prosecution is free even if you find that there may be something that goes towards  claim lang which i think the claim was as we walk through the hierarchy of intrinsic evidence fully supports that the board here is well or we have this concept of an encrypted digital information transmission including encrypted information i think all you the fact that you use the word steel to describe baffles strongly implied that the term fabric baffles does not inherently mean objects of steel similarly here where you have the concept of encrypted information or encrypted digital information that strongly implies based on the claimed language but not all encrypted information and they believe that to be the case in order for their position to prevail here also as judge wright a pointed out this concept that we have  that contained in bed and digital content and so the point here is that you have you're potentially going to have analog pieces of something being referred to in shorthand as digital video or digital audio you can see  that the scramble analog television transmissions i would point to another example if you look at column one hundred and sixty dollars it's about video tape recorders but the president a transmission of conventional recorded programming that has been systems in which there's analog and digital i think that's correct and i believe there's also just straight analog discussions well can i ask you about location for your minutes ok i don't look through the specification for the term locating and locate and i was wondering you know in most of the instances i stock locate seems to mean find not place you know  my phone night locate my business instead locate my phone find versus place and are you aware of any instance in the specification where locating are located is used to mean place dispute which doesn't actually to be at this appear to be a dispute between the terminology the board adopted and the terminology that they're suggesting and so i was left uncertain about whether if we can decide how much let's call it when it delusion can be used and still be part of the process of locating assuming as i guess i mean i am assuming because i i don't understand how one could not assume that this is all about finding and not clay so it's not about deciding where to put something it's about getting it and then the question is what work is empowered to get it but i kind of thought that the board  didn't ever really get to that question but i thought that deciding where to place was part of the construction which seems just happens that everything that's going on here i agree it's confusing i agree the say you know translating from you know cyrillic to latin alphabet that's not computing taking one piece of information another piece of information putting them together through some calculation thank you very much and i'm going to use ten seconds of it are we bound by what the board said by way of construction of the longer phrase encrypted digital information transmission which you don't see either at all or quite to have appealed we did not sort of break it out as a separate roman numeral but i guess i'd point you to page seventeen of the appendix in which the board itself says that the two constructions are interrelated and it incorporates its analysis of the issue that we have appealed in to its analysis of the longer phrase and so we did not break break it out as a separate even if you disagree with us about decrypting you should you should  have a separate discussion about about this but we do think that they are bound up together and one of the reasons that the board's construction of that limiting phrase in the st method step is wrong is because it you may get it's misunderstanding goes back to that st step as well so i think it's fair to say that we did not separately appeal it but we certainly have just stated it all along and the board itself acknowledges that they are closely in a related field let's go back to the car question that i had in winter meant from what would a member of the public reading the file history and the text of the claim the specification in the file history conclude and that might have been a way to do it but it certainly is not the only way to do it i especially because what you have here is quite an ambiguous statement in the in the rd of that you know of the three file history excerpts the one with the amendment in it i wish it's being added in that st method step rather than in the preamble i think you know even if programming or bits of digital information stuff death that's fair and i followed my my answer was kind of folk was focused on the on the st line which we've been discussing but what you say is correct instructive that that that would have effects on other claims i add  language in this patent with this file history and so in addition to the digital amendment even even if there were no digital domain you'd still have the the lexicography in this specification and even if you didn't have that for the this specific