the first case for argument this morning is fifteen to zero seven a week or so ago finance versus continental motive system you know we've put these these cases together mr cain whenever you're ready always meet in the context of the specification is that not the case that there is at least one in body meant that doesn't deal with this numerical value at all no that's not true either and that's where the that's where part of where the border went off and i'm not then it goes into the next paragraph thirty at the bottom there for sixty six the not continuous operation there are two possibilities and that's where your honor clean it up to the first alternative at the cup  so in the context here we're looking at when are we going to take a pressure medicine and we're talking about trying to extend battery life as shown here we're saying and take it once a minute we've shown that that can last about five years so here what this somebody was talking about is the pressure is continually monitored was a mechanical device so we're not going to turn it on every minutes we're going to have sort of a a range where if it's in that range we're not to take any pressure measure it's because we don't need to and then if we get outside of that range we're going to flip the switch to activate the pressure measurement device take that reading and then transmit that represent a pressure and then continues your honor to talk about the second mode of the nine continuous alternative and again that's one where it's a one off measurement were again that the vice is not measuring continuously that thinking that before he or she leaves for the day or maybe when they're stopping at the livery location or wherever they want to check the tire pressure they do something that initiated that pressure measurement so this is all about when we're going to take pressure measurement what is the timing of the pressure measurement nath how the pressure measurement is that's described elsewhere in the device at the present convention a pressure measuring device is provided which measures the veiling pressure in the air chamber of the wheels and outputs a representative electrical signal you know courts there with but then it describes using an absolute pressure describes without reference to any surrounding atmospheric pressure and overpressure reference to the atmospheric pressure and the difference all of which are numeric values so those are the val that the pressure measurement device is taking and and representative of the pressure in the tire that's what's transmitted column five is just describing the  and the onboard computer system is sending a signal to put the device into a paring block or it financially could have a handheld device that would would trigger them but in any that what you're doing is you're telling that you're sending a radio item is producing emitting how putting the pre determined switching signal there's something that's producing a pre determined switching signal that a detector device would be recognizing the detector device is part of the transmitter so i'm just wondering where in the figures are the specification is this position of the floating of the membrane when it hits a certain pressure level the switch is triggered the board also dealt with the corresponding related representative in corresponding terms inscribing the signal the prior art that was discussed specifications and one of the joint appendix and i wondering if you could respond to what mr cain had to say about that as i understood it he's saying this is just talking about timing rather than pressure measurement that's exactly where i was go with the next well kept clear enough no no no no no it was the lever on the same track to start off really what their argument is is that this binary or more simplistic switch is used in addition to what i would call a quantitative switch you know for you know purposes of distinguishing between the two now the way the spec is constructed as we start off with a background of talk about what is a pressure measuring device then they describe in column for this quantitative value is one way to practice it column five starts off with with the first alternative it's an alternative not in addition to they're not saying this improvement where we take this quantitative switch and add a second switch this doesn't talk about timing it doesn't talk about there being two sensors at all it's not there and with a reference you to go see how you would build a system like what's in column five is two european patent applications and if you look at them they're the same binary switch solution that's in the german reference they start off with so really what they're saying here and i think the board was correct was that you know what really did actually deal with all five to be honest they dealt with the one of the background but they see right here this is a specification that discloses binary switches as what is your response to your friends and you can start as deeply in an ordinary meeting of admittance is to send out and it doesn't if you look at the dictionary definitions they don't say this wireless and that the dictionary definition they offer uses the  collection with an ascetic conductor transistor is an example which is clearly not wireless so we start off with a plain and ordinary meaning right there in the definition they offer is a wired connection and the second thing is the way the word admittance is used in the that you can transmit things over wires telephone call twenty's are transmitted over wires the telegraph is transmitted over a wire so those terms they use interchangeably there's nowhere in the specification where the word emittance even though it is used to describe wireless transmissions is given a special meaning where someone jumps up and says this means something different it really means radiate as opposed to send out over some other type of connection a hardwired medium or something like that and then you look at th at the mechanical activated switching device it would be the whichever of the component that receives the circuit closure on the mechanical activation but ok but where exactly is i'm thinking of the tire and i'm thinking of the transmitter or the receiver and the pressure sensor we're we're is it coming from in terms of those components in the wireless embodiment it would be the intensity state mitter in the receiver that's in the middle of the car that all they all talk to so the four sensors will talk to the receiver the receiver can send the signal out or it could be a push button like us and there's a number of ways to do this and they do disclose actually good morning i'll be addressing primarily the cross appeal i claim six enough but i just i just wanted to point the court to column thirteen lines thirteen through sixteen where it talks about the device being on the val turning to i am six and it's dependent claims we believe the board committed legal error by using an improperly heightened anticipation standard and then second by either rejecting or failing to consider what was  comprises fifty possibilities of modulating you know i know you're talking right now narrowly about phase shift keying on versus frequency shifting but maybe when austin was talking about using any modulation means broadly you could be talking about of different kinds of modulations that could be fifty or more different versions then in that instance it's and that hypothetical our case that might be possible in the kennametal case there were thirty one different possibilities and yet the court said that there was enough to have one of ordinary skill at once in vision what we have here are five possibilities which was laid out in the modern communications reference that was used that said a eleven twenty nine and a eleven eighty nine to twelve o nine only five this is like saying if you want to use a say any piece of silver to each one of skill or person or no i have a fortnight spoke and choose from among those here we have five different so based on that we believe that that override standard caused the board to reject or to fail to consider some of the very compelling evidence such as mr andrews admissions that a shift can was known it was paragraph forty six hearing on the thirteenth fifty seven also paragraph forty seven that's his rebuttal of mr henderson in detail and it's not clear that the board even considered that as as we mentioned there was really no clear explanation no persuasive reasoning that this court could clearly review to decide what it was that the board did with respect to this powerful evidence that was before claim to be read written and that revealed one of two errors either the claim should have been held indefinite and the i p r proceeding terminated or the board's claim construction is incorrect and either way  suggest the board should be reversed was seek admits in their brief below brief a twenty seven that claimed nine perhaps could have been drafted more artfully and that's frankly an understatement because the board's claim a claim to always require at least two bits that would be consistent with the phrase at least a four bit sequence because eight bit sequences certainly comfortably encompassed with the claim language of these to four bit sequence i don't i don't remember the board saying something about potentially rewriting the claim to be at least four  but this is what we believe happened in other words your honor you probably said that eight is greater than four but what about between four and eight at least a four bit sequence west mean you must have something in between five six seven or eight and if you rewrite it to say only at least an eight bit sequence which is what you need to do when you change sequence to two beds then you read out the claim five six seven four five six s so that's our point it's not clear what they did it's clear what the construction was but the end result if you interpret it is just as i said it's reading out that portion of the claim to have your trying to interpret the claim according to the way in which we thought it should be interpreted which means at least eight i started these four bits but we didn't have the best i can tell you for whatever our expert to consider is that even if the two bit of construction is adopted or considered to be correct by this court was clearly obvious to use more than one bit there was a reference bits for each of the data identifications and we did you put that together for the board in your petition where you said hey look at boulder or we are just it would be obvious to modify the primary reference with pets we said it would be obvious to have more than one bit although our interpretation was they could have single it and when in lice which is the device on the tire talks about the microprocessor etc and then the next paragraph talks about the fact that you can use the antenna to send that signal if you read over into thirteen it talks about sort of th at twelve paragraphs that begins at forty six i think it's a pretty clear explanation of that using the antenna to transmit a signal to ok so i guess you would say in ten or twelve there's no street i don't think you know that is a it that's exactly what it is the timing of when that pressure is going to be taken there's been an argument made in the briefing that it did make sense to have two separate pressure measuring devices here because you use battery but the whole point is the mechanical switch doesn't use any battery it's a mechanical switch it's floating there's a membrane floating against the pressure and it only when was telling me that as a told the board that you can use a switch based pressure sensor to measure the pressure you're telling me to know if it's really saying it's when you  activate the measuring device but i guess when i ask you is where in contact does it say ok we're just talking about this european patent solely in the context of when to measure and then after we've activated the measuring device now the measuring device is going to go get a number i mean where does it say that in column five well again it starts out of course we're told so this whole it wouldn't be able to guess if you got a list appear of the times when it can occur it can occur once per minute it can occur when the mechanical switch is this triggered it can occur when it's extremely initiate with respect to the claims six we're talking about no claim structure here actual findings by the board standard review substantial evidence so the question is is there substantial evidence supporting  limited number there is no evidence or i or that there's a limited number that's exactly what the board set their sights and no evidence that there is a limited number of choices all they've said is th this one and these are well not so it's a design tools this particular one is well known that's a that's not saying that they've never done anything to identify what the number of choices might be on the board so the  in more than we need more than one bit so so in our minds when we see at least a four bit sequence in the claim we should raise the number four from our minds and replace it with eight i think you give us a bunch of page numbers can you quote us exactly what you want us to read yes i will quote paragraph one o seven where it says a graph one of seven a person and it's at the end where he says such transmission techniques were well known in the art the time of the five thirty four patent filing that's a constant frequency transmission technique mr andrews in his deposition