way forward to today and all of that evidence shows that a waypoint doesn't include intermediate points which is what the court limited it to below but also destination reference me to to the g one to one s and this shows in the middle of the page it talks about the story in just storing your position in g p s and it is a continuous by saying this page also displays the varying in range from the nearest way point and then it talks about which is typically the destination  destination of your current trip as a way point isn't there a distinction there that there is a distinction there is there is a distinction here and this is showing the destinations this particular reference show the destinations are certainly can be wait once the little motorola that it certainly does not show that it shows that a prior destination prior destination can be now be treated as a waypoint it doesn't show that the destination is a way point you can't define the way unless you include all those points including the destination you're familiar with where the term waypoint has been used in orienteering for at least a hundred years so this is an eight thirteen fifteen and this is a common one of this motorola pattern from ninety two right around one thirty six it begins and it says the term waypoint generally refers to a desired destination or navigational reference point to be reached which may be a final destination or one of a series of intermediate destinations or navigational reference points to be traversed so this is in the background section of a a patent for motorola motorola's certainly in this industry is familiar with how these terms are used on the priest patent by some years so this is this is good evidence we think outweighs the evidence of a of a dictionary actually definition from mcgraw hill to show what people in the industries considered to be well we don't have any evidence in the record of that but that wouldn't surprise me if it was so let's go back to some of the examples that there were gifts were given though if you're going to go to europe or just to the airport you're locate a location then another one then another one then my destination is the ridge in the mountains along the way out i'm going go to the river we're going the big oak tree then i can figure my way plant my way between each one and figure out maybe even how many steps i'm going to take to to get there figure out the link to much depth and maybe even figure out how long it's going to take for me to get to the destination but it's just the way that the accused devices operates with a similar i think what you don't thing only only compute the each stop along the way and nothing else no i don't so it would be to a point rather what these plans are directed to they're directed to determining a more accurate expected time of arrival and the way it does that is it provides is because you want to have one waypoint at the destination right and one's at least one intermediate point so even if you have a single destination trip like going to the airport when you plug that into the device that would be covered by the spot and it would generate the trip it would generate around it would indicate certain markers along the way leading up to it so it could more accurately if you if you pass x intersection at this time in those series or how discuss your hypothetical so those are that and so you have to know the final destination to calculate all the time right that's exactly right and that's that's why the it's trying to be more accurate think that devices use these kind of reference point in calculating their estimated time of arrival or do they just say here's where you're starting here's where you're going to and they map it out using roads and and have some other map they don't have an anything saying you're late at this waypoint you're late at this point it's just an overall part of what they do if they have a break up the route so they have their destination they break it up in these different terminology but it's essentially broken up into of the route is get on three ninety five at a certain access and you get there and it knows that from leaving your house to getting on the next day you're supposed to be there at a certain time and you're either late or early that's which dealt with destinations and this was a later path and that was based on the same spec that then added claims dealing with weight points as opposed to  destinations so it's very logical that the waypoints here which were confined to figure two were only things along the way the very meaning of a point so can i ask you the same question i ask your colleague do  you are intermediate destinations both destinations and waypoints where the waypoints in your view only the reference markers along the route well your honor at least in figure two they refer to in the past and as one trip for one destination if you decide to stop that or anything then you have to punch in a new destination and get a new route so we don't have a multi destination device that that can be accused here i understand others may but that is not what we have but their claim doesn't only cover multi destination routes i mean it could cover a single destination route but i think it's conceivable it could typically but there was at least in the case of four rise of one discontinued build which actually gave you a clock time at your final destination but because kept as they were until you get in there right but if that's what it's doing you know it's it's it's got markers along the way whether it's it's a reference points or it's where you're supposed to turn or wherever and if you're not there on time to add extra time four minutes address the eighteen or the device specifically but i would point out we have this if you would look at a one one five seven we actually do have one of the inventors say a document that was provided as point it's zero point but interesting now say they claim that that's a conception document what else do it have to support this waypoint the only thing in there is to be a point and it's defined specifically as something between the beginning and the final destination exactly what is the definition that's consistent with their respective stations ninety eight one zero one five seven is defined to be a point of intermediate points between the source and the final destination so to the extent that is supporting the conception which they they claim that's exactly consistent with figure to evac under oath to micro and and the every kind of case which we cited in our brief is that the issue of claim constructions one that's to go to both meaning and scope and that's an issue of law we had a situation here where as to the terms that were raised the dispute went to their scope not just the meaning of a word and we had to have that scope defined so that the jury would would be doing what they did properly should do when and judge stark is very concerned about whether you just tell me what it is is that giving enough by the court and we suggested it to make sure that the scope was clear because it was very clear to us what the plaintiffs intended to do was to take a certain argument and then run with this to the to the to the jury and argue that it brought enough to include this so that's why it was put in because the real battle in this claim construction was focused on s minimum and a master required three offsets and it it pointed out very specifically that because of the scope of the plane as construed that under your specific exclusion doctrine that it w any equivalents that only have had to offset so it was a claim construction it's still that jump to there and i'll note that that case was relied on by judge starr but it wasn't even raised by their opening brief and only in their reply did they raise it and i'll note that that they they represented it improperly in the case of they they said that it was a case  that involves clear disclaimer in the prosecution and they cited a part of a sentence for that for that position on their on their brief on page twenty seven well the the court noted that the prosecution disclaimer was not found but they said under the specific exclusion rule you still would not reach of the e i think materially there is no real difference in these products as far as little infringement they have a destination that may be a time or it may be a remaining travel time time being in time a day remaining travel time all of these products use various nodes but the only thing they use on these various nodes to calculate that last number is a time interval that were tapped or how much time between or how much time to the reason it does it that way so it's an animal together and time intervals are very different in that sense then a time of day because you can't add a series of times a day together but you can add time intervals and that's the reason they all work that way there's there's some outlier issues regarding these the ability to download multiple destinations from a website and there's also an outlier issue about being able to search for other destinations this is discussed in the briefing book let me explain that that's a different issue and all it goes to is the fact that all of these products even if you go search on the web site for different places you may want to visit these handsets can only pick one destination the time give your route there i the user have to go in and i have to pick a different destination from among those that i may have downloaded they're not that smart in that respect they simply do not do multiple shows you restaurants that you're going along and you can pick them out after your time in the restaurant can you just put resume trap you can you can go it depends on the specific implementation specific product you can pull up the at the restaurant already you can select you can select the the last destination you were going to and then you have to go back into the last that prior destination that's that's what it would be from a prior destination  let me ask you a question so that your opponent has a chance to speak to respond and in rebuttal in your read brief that propane seven you say that arguments regarding the navigator product or throw in the arguments directed to navigator product is the navigation product just a handset product just like you type in the the destination such track premium is a separate bigger product that's used for fleet management and tracking vehicle one component of that is navigator the navigator issues are all there as far as track premium there's just no independent issues related to track pretty printing it all comes down to the navigator product  eighteen to chase and it really all comes down to simply the issues of whether the waypoints on the way to that final destination are using times of day which they are not and for good reason because it has to be able adam together and that there is one destination at a time in the products that we use do you think their product in these in times of data to measure the  they have to do the same thing to convert them out there's no way their products are saying your way point it three thirty and you're at the next waypoint at three forty five the computer or whatever it's not even doing it and our minute format it's doing it in some other kind of but there's a very different use for the time of day that it uses at these waypoints and that is to look at that time of day and compare it to the time exposed to be there and figure out whether it's early or way late sure but when the computers is doing the comparison and the computer is not thinking it's three fifteen and i was supposed to be here at three thirty it's using some computer way of numbering the i don't even know about it's not using three fifteen and three thirty well the difference this goes to a little bit there format argument this is more than four maps how much i can use a stopwatch to tell how long it's going to take me to get somewhere but i cannot compare an appointment time with an expected time of arrival unless i have a clock but not what the pattern is using the expected times of arrival for they if i could add one this one point they characterize are true invention as being a technique to determine in time more accurate it's to it's to see if a driver is gone off on because i think their invention is more than that the claims require a dispatcher they require require a mobile unit and they require determine the expected time of arrival we haven't heard any discussion of what the invention described in the patent is in the context of a dispatch for the purposes you have a dispatcher and says at the very beginning of the path you have a dispatcher further transportation systems would benefit from a dispatching function that monitors and directs travel routes and expect the time of arrival of those carriers for example dispatchers long haul or local big bowls desirous of some that allows access to expected time of arrival to make routing and dispatching decisions later it's not this is in the context of vehicle management with the dispatcher it's using expected time arrival what's it using it for where you are you can look at figure four and you can see what it's using it's or it's using it to figure out if it's going to get there early or late  change you know the routing schedules and all such it's not just how long it's going to take to get the navigator it's so i we're there's really no way to waive that because that's exactly what we've been talking about so i want to touch on athletic alternatives as well and also t say that these claims rejected those claims on that base and what we see that to mean is that the examiner understood that time in this instance covers both time intervals remaining time those things are an and of course later on the court used that is so with respect to that the final history itself the lower court said you know yet keep the lord does not agree with us that the examiner applies time  intervals to expect time of arrival because of the difference between estimated and expected even though everyone sitting here today has acknowledged that this really is a generally mean the same thing there's no distinction between those two but that's how the just a court said i'm going to ignore what the examiner d and did to support his finding the comparison of a point in times which was then let you separately by the by the court it really brings up an interesting path the court took which i think because of the wrong path the ordinary meaning of time is brought it includes both formats there's no dispute nobody is arguing contrary to that the specification itself you can say that people have argued that but the court itself in his in his ruling he said there is no exclusionary language in the claims no exclusionary language in the in the specification and of course with the pile history discussion that you can find a disclaimer there so we're we're sitting in a situation where we have no solution or language if you look at the  saying well i see i've already concluded that it's time of day to not going to backfill and say well look at the patents talking about this it uses it in a time of day for me but what we know from the specs is that it discloses remaining time and time of when you have a basis to do so with a negative limitation that's best not included the jury is going to have a hard time understanding that what the judge is saying is us the literal skull and not the doctor the cook not the lower court here when even further and said you  my own negative limitation in created that binary choice that fear and brilliant and those cases say you cannot do and that's what happened here if we'd gree with the district court's construction of a waypoint to not include the final destination does that mean that your opponents stop and french know that why not i started with that and that is because the remaining time there are many times are determined at all the intermediate points so it's also determined the final destination but all the intermediate points along the way so if if waypoints is unchanged and e t a is changed then it all comes back and then but even if both constructions are kept the same there's still the issue of literal