exploration it had no useful non infringing use and that's a paper converting case of this court and i should have authorized the inclusion of that ship in the royalty base it was one of the primary issues definition of manufacturing clued in to work as raw or partly wrong materials and a suitable forms were used several dictionaries have similar should we interpret manufacture and we ought to be giving the full force an effect of the patent extended period for that if we're going to be in a paper converting situation where the competitor or in this case the na motion was brought during written discovery early in the case and we were still in document production the case developed and we did find exactly that kind of evidence or our we found subterfuge to hide the patent infringement navy tested to develop misleading low pressure dated near the transom stuff and they actually tried to use that data at trial until we called them on it and that's the picture shows the transom stern area contacts and stuff concave and that translates that difference of one and a half inches translates to eighteen inches on that ship and that ship be a speedboat named the dust reroute and some italian ferries that was false we were actually told in a letter from the navy in the rejection letter that they had evidence that there out later that the bow section which you know arguably shouldn't be considered part of the claim it's not in the claim but he wanted to import that that limitation into the claim to show that it had been completed that work on the b years i'm not saying i'm just saying that this is an open claim and wherever you find that list of features that's an infringement and and there's a whole lot of things your honor that it's not that make that ship go that is it in this claim there disagree because i think you import that limitation into the claim to defeat this but now you bet it was it was another week of welding and assembly to put a bow on and that's that's pretty close it's over ninety five percent complete contradicting the supreme court's holdings in deep south and warner jenkinson the truck court correctly rejected fascist argument and it correctly held that the unassembled l c s three could not have been manufactured within the scope of twenty eight crap case which basically held there's this is a strict waiver of sovereign immunity it doesn't include the word manufacture and as a result congress came in and specifically waive sovereign immunity in one thousand eight hundred two use w manufacture now as far as the specific definition of manufacture i don't think there has been one i think that the courts have traditionally treated it the same as making under two seventy one day which is essentially a complete assembly of the whole that's ready for use and that is not present in this particular case under deep south or under any of the other of course presidents that always require a complete the simply of the whole in paper converting it s seems to be a unique case where there was a scheme to avoid infringement where there was an injunction against magna graphics are you familiar with this old tech yes i am your honor i think part of the north of  honor and i believe the reason is that it teaches about meaning manufacture if any i think the only thing that will type teaches us with respect to the meaning of manufacture is that it has to include the definition of make under two seventy one day which i've already described but as far as what it's all tech considered voltec considered the meaning of you spray and with respect to use the court held that directs in french women covered by two seventy one she could come within the meaning when you're talking about manufacture you have to look at the what the supreme court said in deep south and what this court said in other cases like the scintilla data case where they said that the court said that in order to have a manufacture you have to have a complete combination complete it we can have an argument as far as what percentage but i think the fact that everybody agrees that the claim combination wasn't one hundred percent complete makes it undisputed that there was no complete combination of paper converting  you had a sale you had a scheme to avoid infringement and if you had each of the components were completely many for factual and tested essentially as a whole here at the actually believe that it's in december before the grand mal module was completed but yes your honor it was december several months after for it to me and i'm sorry i think you're reading too much into the implication as far as you know when these very specific aspects of the components were completed the ship wasn't even launched for several months after and even at that time the power source doesn't seem to you know been connected or tested or anything else i don't know exactly when the ship was manufactured but i know that as of may eighteenth the ship was not manufacture is the right number of what went into the adjustment so it's a minor adjustment relatively speaking but nevertheless a different number than the trial court calculated right so my understanding is that the court based on the royalty based on the expected cost as of a particular date and he cited a sheet that had the expected passant but he actually cited in correct number for green fails to provide sufficient notice if it depends on the unpredictable vagaries of one person's opinion the trial court correctly construed increases efficiency of the hall as a term of degree but then fascist satisfied its burden of proof using an attorney created chart in a supposed trial reply brief based on the unsupported testimony of its inventor twenty six years after the patents we're first  kill lots as a unit of power in fact the intrinsic record shows that power is uniformly referred to as force power can you show me where in the rescue record you units rather than kill or we have never argued that figure eleven was plotted in metric units we've we've always contested that figure eleven was plotted in force power find it necessary when it comes to ya using well there is such thing as metric force power to your arm which actually represents less power than an imperial force power but i think the phrase for enough of itself raises an implication that you're talking about imperial units and especially once you read the specification and in the specification they talk about different water jets being rated and different horse powers there's never an indication that they're talking about kilowatts of a measure of power or shaft power and you look at the different figures in the specification and the different figures in the specification are phrased in terms of horsepower as well too so i think the overall implication of intrinsic record is that these are imperial units power these are horse power and so to take one comment from trial that this could have been plotted in kilowatts which represents a thirty four percent increase  testimony of mr waters he said that these vessels go fast because they have more force power than any other ship in the united states navy other than aircraft carriers essentially deep in fresh water and if you plot forty three knots on their graph the horse power required to do forty three knots is over one hundred forty thousand horsepower you're there on a graph is