on he's ok why it isn't a simple proposition on which we vs the board on printed matter would be required is that the printed matter exception requires the necessary but not sufficient condition that element that issue claims a particular expressive content of some express this doesn't and in particular the direction of an expression is not the expressive co it doesn't matter whether the reader is a computer or a human being origins of the expression are not part of the communicative content and as far as i can tell the printed matter doctrin has never been applied except when what is being claimed is the particular communicative content if it is then there are some exceptions and you can be a relation a functional a more difficult proposition to sustain then the narrow proposition that in an element that does not claim not content of a communication explained to the computer and this is what it is this is how it should be operated on whereas if the data structure is if it's the audience file it is the star spangled banner the star spangled banner part of it is the underlying content and that should ready pretty heavily and maybe this is perfectly sufficient i guess on a combination of two things one that the search request at least i number of picking things on the list descriptions in the specification are fully accounted for by the specifications acknowledgement that sometimes searches don't need to be performed because those would be examples i still think that the underlying policy of the printer matter doctrine applies in this case and not as this court's pointing pharmaceuticals want to prevent the indefinite patenting of of claims just by adding on a novel by into the material that is current if the material said i come from the user as opposed to i come from third party then the origins would be part of the descriptive content so i think that's that's the point or anything like that where women are into the software package and this company comes along and said we've found a new method that doesn't confine you to just the materials here you can also go and use your personal resources why isn't that a functional difference well fact if that was the case that really you know choosing from that in the prior art there's only been going to trump and then you're you're claiming that you so you can choose from problematic i think that the issue that the board came across here was that that they set the claim sets up to have you know it was distinction between where you get your your well that's it from but then in the rest of the third party from yourself from the internet from it doesn't go to the origin of it has no bearing on how the method is performed except for certain parts of the south using different words as you go to a different place i mean the fact that everything else of the program the same way doesn't mean that this particular method stuff has no function i mean if nobody ever thought of it before the fact that the only difference is being under the claim received it is not the act of doing something it is an information package to be acted on by the receiver of that information that's not a selective retrieving of data and while that may seem like a small matter it seems to me to get at the problem with the  or more criteria for how the receiver of this information packet is supposed to go in front of us and that's what it seems to me the board eliminated with its claim constructional i think that the board is just making an argument that the doctrine that is non statutory that it's been said over many decades to be one without a very decent statutory foundation should be broadened according to some broad the following information to somebody correct but i don't think it was the fact that it was communicating information that wrong is there any printed matter case that doesn't happen and a minimum just a necessary condition sufficient and a minimum required involves a printed matter case in which the doctrine was applied to support disregarding a claimed element that didn't involve an element that cl content of an expression i'm not aware of i'm not either but this is i mean it's still provided that the origin is still providing you some information it's providing information to the the printed matter they did not say the origins of what that sense was the printed matter and so had the board done that we would have changed our appeal requirement to address that particular point request was made the color palette six forty does that language use the phrase search requests to have a simple pick from a menu that you are looking for menu that has already has a criteria applied to it which is a color palette so you've had it's a search request in the context of either co