our first case this morning is data encryption versus microsoft mr dorman summary of invention and whether you encrypt order or have encrypted data remain in the kernel space is simply one of a number of potential uses is not the invention itself you know you by the inventors needs to define the invention and they should be held to what they intended but she did contrast those cases with the facts here at bar here the statements by the panties relied on for disavowal the elements of their claim are met and even the the alleged infringer does practicing some but not all of the articulated particular potential use so we're in  excuses limitations in the claim and that's precisely the point is that they are in grasping onto a system claim use limitation which is increasingly to the argument that you somehow this is the plan scope so what we have now is regrettably a situation where people are increasingly orgies are feeling so fully transfers within main memory to determine the incursion state and selectively applies encryption decryption on the transfer of issue in this case which key to this case is the fundamental dispute that we have with microsoft concerning logical management remember with this talk about talking about transfer if i physically transfer data from the test to the  the portion that says you said encryption routine and tell me what your construction  with the kernel mode of control operating on the data is in place and the transfer then the transfer ers where there is a logical switch to the second are one in the same so that if explaining the whole the in figure four c you see two different clocks on the right left hand side those are really the same clocks the transfer is occurring through a change of the logical address that's an explanation then at the bottom even that this again is encrypted done in place repeatedly i'm not understand to transferring the pre determined block through sending christian but transfers you're telling me it's not here but that's what we're talking about are talking about going to give me your time next you'll be fine thank you necessary to resolve this case this figure is part of the intrinsic record of the patent it comes from box design of the unix operating system which is incorporated by reference into the cabin specification and it provides a logical layout of the computer system when it is transferred to one from tips on this diary and on page six of our brief that's between the red and the blue the claims on the other hand both claims five and independent language provides an independent basis for the court summary judgment so regardless of disavowal regardless of the location of data that this court based soley on the plain language confirm the judgment below however i'd like to explain to you how this claim language provides the structure relevant to the disadvantage statements in the specification if the data is being transferred from this on the other hand in power when the deep connection does not happen until between the blue and yellow when the data is transferred from the disk to the blue it is still inspected and it's  in the first logical data area is only decrypt it when it is passed up to the user replication between the boundary between the blue and the was selectively directly pre determined selectively to rectify the transfer of data between the first and second logical data here is one of the benefits of the vanishing invention mr gorman's only argument why the claim language alone why that basis does not provide microsoft grounds for summary judgment is really a disputed issue  language selectively directing the transfer doesn't require encryption upon transfer occurs at the time of that transfer and where would we look to to pin that point down you that was your response to generators question might my follow up is where in the past would we find support for defined is that it's part of the transfer operation it has to actually be in memory so in other words the data is physically in the memory buffer by saying it happens during transfer it means that it happens as part of the transfer operations part of the set instructions in software that is transferring the data between the current memory and the user in answer to the court's previous column five beginning at line fifty nine the specifications draws a clear distinction when it is talking about a process running the mode the entire data file need not be read into memory or otherwise copy for depression rather only the specific block containing the file portion requested unaware and uninformed of the operations of present pension our philip we know focus in on a single advantage is limiting the client that's absolutely right and that's why the language fourteen provides the something more that this core is required somewhat helpful to your argument but it's in the context of something that may or may not be read into the memory say if the claim did say maintain encrypted there's no maintain word in the claim is there there's not the claim just says encrypt ssion routine directing transfer through said encryption routine which may happen in the same place may not include transfers all while i believe the claim does require that there be a transfer between correct me there is no prosecution history that adds any weight to your  will give you a couple minutes to wind up here one final point going back to mr gorman's argument about the logical versus the physical the question is not whether there is a physical world logical transfer of the question is what must be transferred and again looking at the language of the play the language of the claim refers to data areas and data space it's not moods of operation bottom it's made very clear that user memory addresses can still be accessed while operating her anywhere in the record is there anything that says a change in mode is the same as a transfer well i don't think that that definition statement is not is not anywhere but how do i well reach that program code and userspace the process within which such extension is occurring that exist and use a remote when the process is executed in kernel space then execution is incredible and you are quite correct to honor that it would have been change mode specification of the recall no copy of that data is made as written or so what happened was whatever processing instructions are working or working on the right place it isn't physically taken somewhere