[00:00:00] Speaker 04:
hockey line versus staff.

[00:00:41] Speaker 04:
Please proceed.

[00:00:43] Speaker 02:
Good morning.

[00:00:44] Speaker 02:
May it please the court, Jason Angel representing Hockeyline, Inc.

[00:00:49] Speaker 02:
The court should reverse the board's finding that claim one of Hockeyline's 107 patent is unpatentable because the court misconstrued two terms in claim one of Hockeyline's 107 patent.

[00:01:00] Speaker 02:
The board committed legal error first in its construction of the term transferring statistical information based on such inputted data.

[00:01:08] Speaker 02:
And as a result of the legal error,

[00:01:10] Speaker 02:
Substantial evidence does not support the board's finding that the two references, Hameen and Tia, and Stats Football anticipate Claim 1.

[00:01:20] Speaker 02:
The second error the board committed was in its construction of customized by the user to reflect desired data.

[00:01:27] Speaker 02:
Under the correct construction, neither reference discloses a device that includes menu-based screens that may be customized by a user.

[00:01:34] Speaker 00:
How do you respond to the argument that your patent specification repeatedly

[00:01:40] Speaker 00:
refers to the information that's gathered from a game or input from the user as being statistical information.

[00:01:48] Speaker 00:
Or says that the statistical information is gathered, calculated, and distributed.

[00:01:55] Speaker 02:
So the patent does not use the term statistical information when it refers to the gathering of information.

[00:02:02] Speaker 00:
It doesn't?

[00:02:02] Speaker 02:
No.

[00:02:03] Speaker 00:
What about like at column one, line 57, I think it is, it says,

[00:02:10] Speaker 00:
This is the summary of the invention, first paragraph.

[00:02:13] Speaker 00:
It says, the present invention provides an electronic score-keeping device for gathering, calculating, and distributing statistical information.

[00:02:21] Speaker 02:
So that's referring, Your Honor, when it refers to statistical information in that context, it's not referring to information that's gathered by the user.

[00:02:29] Speaker 02:
And that's the way the term is used in the claim.

[00:02:31] Speaker 02:
So in that context, the specification is referring to the gathering of statistical information

[00:02:38] Speaker 02:
But what that means, what we understand that to mean, is that the device itself is gathering the statistical information.

[00:02:44] Speaker 02:
Elsewhere in the specification, when the patent refers to statistical data or statistics that are gathered, it's referring to data that is gathered by the user.

[00:02:55] Speaker 02:
But in the claim, in claim one, there's a clear distinction between statistical information that's based on data that's input by the user and the data that's input by the user.

[00:03:08] Speaker 02:
So there's a very clear distinction between the two in the claim, even though the patent is in the specification, it's a little bit less clear.

[00:03:16] Speaker 01:
One of the points your opposing counsel makes in the red brief is that your arguments, core argument on 21 running over to 22,

[00:03:36] Speaker 01:
The average, the elapsing of five seconds is very different from revised calculations of, for example, batting average, average goals per game, or other common statistics, and so on.

[00:03:48] Speaker 01:
But that wasn't raised before the P tab.

[00:03:51] Speaker 01:
Can you tell me where it was raised in the record?

[00:03:56] Speaker 02:
Your Honor, I don't have a specific citation for that in the record.

[00:03:58] Speaker 02:
But what we were trying to do in our brief there was just to explain what statistical information is.

[00:04:03] Speaker 01:
Well, no, no, no, no, no.

[00:04:06] Speaker 01:
Is your answer, it wasn't raised before the PCAB?

[00:04:09] Speaker 02:
I don't have a site for you, but I can look before I stand up next time and see if I can find it.

[00:04:14] Speaker 02:
I don't have that off the top of my head.

[00:04:16] Speaker 02:
However, the context in which we're using it in the brief is just to help explain the distinction between statistical information and data that's input.

[00:04:25] Speaker 02:
It's just an example.

[00:04:27] Speaker 01:
It's not an argument?

[00:04:29] Speaker 02:
Well, it is an argument.

[00:04:31] Speaker 01:
It was the argument raised before PCAB.

[00:04:33] Speaker 02:
The argument that there's a difference between statistical information that's based on data was clearly raised below.

[00:04:40] Speaker 02:
Yes, it was.

[00:04:41] Speaker 02:
Was the specific example about batting averages and Buster Posey use?

[00:04:47] Speaker 02:
I don't recall.

[00:04:48] Speaker 02:
However, the argument that statistical information is a separate and distinct category of information, that argument was absolutely right.

[00:04:58] Speaker 01:
Was the argument made that game state does not qualify as statistical information?

[00:05:03] Speaker 02:
The game state information, that argument came up only in STATS' reply brief.

[00:05:10] Speaker 02:
And it came up in response to our argument that there's no disclosure in STATS football of the transfer of statistical information, which we made in our Patanona response.

[00:05:21] Speaker 02:
So we did not have an opportunity to make the argument in written form because it only showed up in the reply brief.

[00:05:34] Speaker 02:
So with respect to claim one, the term transferring statistical information based on such inputted data to a central database via communication means appears in the fifth element of claim one.

[00:05:48] Speaker 02:
The term such inputted data, data is referred to five times in claim one.

[00:05:55] Speaker 02:
So the second element refers to a processor for inputting data.

[00:05:59] Speaker 02:
The third element refers to a memory means coupled to the processor.

[00:06:03] Speaker 02:
for storing inputted data.

[00:06:05] Speaker 02:
The fourth element refers to a display means coupled to the processor for facilitating the entry of such data by a user.

[00:06:13] Speaker 02:
And the fifth element refers to transferring statistical information based on such inputted data.

[00:06:19] Speaker 00:
And then the last... Do you agree that the based on such inputted data could at least include a subset?

[00:06:25] Speaker 02:
No, Your Honor, I don't agree with that.

[00:06:27] Speaker 00:
So... Based on?

[00:06:29] Speaker 00:
statistics for a particular player, you know, at a particular event at a hockey game, and then I only want to send some of them up.

[00:06:39] Speaker 00:
You don't think that that would be transferring statistical information based on the inputted data?

[00:06:44] Speaker 02:
No, the statistical information is clearly within the context of claim one, a different category of information.

[00:06:51] Speaker 02:
It wouldn't make sense to say that information is based on itself.

[00:06:56] Speaker 02:
That just doesn't make sense.

[00:06:59] Speaker 00:
Information that's sent can be based on information that's collected, particularly in light of your specification.

[00:07:08] Speaker 00:
I'm having a hard time with your argument because your specification says over and over again that statistical information is gathered.

[00:07:17] Speaker 00:
It even says input.

[00:07:19] Speaker 00:
I mean, I understood your prior argument maybe to be arguing a distinction between input and gathering.

[00:07:25] Speaker 00:
But your own patent specification refers to inputting statistical information, entering statistical information.

[00:07:35] Speaker 00:
So I guess your argument really comes down to based on and whether based on changes the data.

[00:07:45] Speaker 02:
Well, two points in response to that, Your Honor.

[00:07:47] Speaker 02:
So the patent refers to statistical information in only one way.

[00:07:51] Speaker 02:
And that's in the transfer of that information

[00:07:54] Speaker 02:
to the central server via the transferring means.

[00:07:58] Speaker 00:
You're saying the specification?

[00:08:00] Speaker 02:
Well, certainly the claim and the specification when it discusses statistics, I agree with you that it does mention at times it says statistics are gathered.

[00:08:10] Speaker 00:
Or input or input.

[00:08:11] Speaker 02:
Or statistics or input, but the specific term used in the claim is statistical information.

[00:08:18] Speaker 02:
And as it's used in claim one, that statistical information is only information that's based on the information that's input.

[00:08:26] Speaker 02:
It is never gathered by the user.

[00:08:28] Speaker 02:
And we know from the context of claim one that the data is the only thing that's input by the user.

[00:08:36] Speaker 02:
So the board and stats point to the preamble, for example, which includes the language that you mentioned, which says,

[00:08:44] Speaker 02:
a device for gathering, processing, and distributing statistical information.

[00:08:50] Speaker 02:
But when it uses the term gathering, when the preamble uses the term gathering, it doesn't refer to the user gathering that statistical information.

[00:09:00] Speaker 00:
But your specification does.

[00:09:01] Speaker 00:
Aren't I supposed to interpret the claims in light of your specification?

[00:09:04] Speaker 02:
Your Honor, the specification actually does not use the term statistical information as gathered by the user.

[00:09:11] Speaker 02:
It does not use that term.

[00:09:14] Speaker 02:
So every instance of gathering statistics or gathering data refers to the user inputting that information into the device, but statistical information is never gathered by the user.

[00:09:26] Speaker 04:
At least with regard to claim one, in anticipation by the stats football reference, the board went on to find in the alternative that stats football maintained a game state

[00:09:39] Speaker 04:
satisfied the limitation even if it were to accept your construction and that therefore there would be anticipation.

[00:09:45] Speaker 04:
Do you have a response to that?

[00:09:47] Speaker 02:
Yes, Your Honor.

[00:09:48] Speaker 02:
Game state information is not statistical information.

[00:09:50] Speaker 02:
That's pure raw data information about the game.

[00:09:53] Speaker 02:
It's just the game data.

[00:09:55] Speaker 04:
Just like if the... It says it's calculated based on data input by the user.

[00:10:01] Speaker 04:
For example, run for five yards.

[00:10:04] Speaker 02:
So if the machine calculates run for five yards, so the

[00:10:08] Speaker 02:
The previous information would be the players are on the 25-yard line, then run five yards, and the machine updates that to be okay, now we're on the 30-yard line.

[00:10:18] Speaker 02:
That's not a statistic.

[00:10:20] Speaker 02:
It's just a current status of the game at that point.

[00:10:24] Speaker 04:
It's not the data that was inputted.

[00:10:25] Speaker 04:
The data that was inputted would be run for five yards.

[00:10:28] Speaker 04:
And what the machine is reporting is now you're on the 30-yard line, where previously you were on the 25.

[00:10:33] Speaker 04:
It might just be addition.

[00:10:34] Speaker 04:
It might be simple.

[00:10:35] Speaker 04:
But it is a calculation that manipulates and changes the data.

[00:10:38] Speaker 02:
But it's not a statistic.

[00:10:40] Speaker 02:
Why?

[00:10:40] Speaker 02:
And that's the key point.

[00:10:41] Speaker 04:
Why?

[00:10:41] Speaker 02:
Because a statistic is something that it's a calculation and the specification.

[00:10:46] Speaker 04:
This is a calculation.

[00:10:48] Speaker 02:
But simply a calculation doesn't make something a statistic.

[00:10:51] Speaker 02:
A statistic has to be something that is a batting average is a statistic.

[00:10:56] Speaker 02:
Goals against average is a statistic.

[00:10:58] Speaker 02:
Where you are on the field is not a statistic.

[00:11:02] Speaker 02:
like the automatic updating of data that stats refers to Heme and Antia disclosing as data being input by the machine.

[00:11:12] Speaker 02:
So when it's referring to the Heme and Antia reference and it describes a bowling game and data automatically being updated by the machine, it calls that inputting data.

[00:11:24] Speaker 02:
So that's an automatic procedure just like the automatic calculation of the current

[00:11:31] Speaker 02:
game state.

[00:11:33] Speaker 02:
So it's not a statistic, however a calculation is performed.

[00:11:48] Speaker 04:
You're into your rebuttal time.

[00:11:49] Speaker 04:
Would you like to save the remainder?

[00:11:51] Speaker 02:
Yes, Your Honor, I would like to save the remainder.

[00:11:53] Speaker 04:
Let's hear from our post in council then.

[00:12:11] Speaker 03:
Thank you, Your Honors.

[00:12:12] Speaker 03:
It may please the Court.

[00:12:14] Speaker 03:
The Board's decision, which is based on substantial evidence, should be affirmed in all respects.

[00:12:19] Speaker 03:
The Board properly found that claim one was anticipated by both StatsFootball and Amina Dilla, and claim one is the only issue here at appeal.

[00:12:28] Speaker 03:
In particular, as my friend said, the appellant's position hinges on the construction of two particular claim limitations, statistical information and customized.

[00:12:38] Speaker 03:
With the court's permission, I would like to address two main points.

[00:12:42] Speaker 03:
First, I'll address why the board properly construed those two disputed elements, claim one.

[00:12:48] Speaker 03:
And second, I'd like to address why one prior art reference, Stats Football, anticipates claim one under both the board's construction and even under appellant's construction of the claim terms.

[00:12:59] Speaker 01:
Turning to the first.

[00:13:00] Speaker 01:
As a housekeeping, was Hawking Line's claim construction argument for transferring statistical

[00:13:07] Speaker 01:
information based on such inputted data raised below or not?

[00:13:13] Speaker 03:
The claim construction argument?

[00:13:15] Speaker 03:
Yeah.

[00:13:16] Speaker 03:
It's actually funny.

[00:13:18] Speaker 01:
The board said- In the middle, it's around 34 of your brief and then 21 of theirs.

[00:13:25] Speaker 01:
And that's why I was asking your opposing counsel about it.

[00:13:28] Speaker 03:
Right.

[00:13:29] Speaker 03:
So the board actually determined that Hockenline did not propose a specific construction for that term.

[00:13:35] Speaker 03:
Nevertheless, they were asking for an interpretation.

[00:13:37] Speaker 03:
of how that term should be understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art, whether that's actually construction or construing a construction or an interpretation.

[00:13:48] Speaker 03:
Nevertheless, I don't know if that's relevant necessarily here.

[00:13:52] Speaker 03:
Hockeyline is certainly asking that that term be interpreted in a particular way.

[00:13:58] Speaker 03:
And the point that we're making here is that the board's construction of that term is proper.

[00:14:02] Speaker 03:
And even if you assume Hockeyline's interpretation,

[00:14:06] Speaker 03:
Claim one is anticipated, nevertheless.

[00:14:12] Speaker 04:
Why is claim one anticipated, nonetheless?

[00:14:14] Speaker 04:
Why isn't his argument about what constitutes a statistic and what does not accurate?

[00:14:20] Speaker 04:
I mean, the fact that you're on the five yard line, that's not a statistic.

[00:14:23] Speaker 04:
He's right about that, isn't he?

[00:14:26] Speaker 03:
I'm not sure if he is or not.

[00:14:28] Speaker 04:
You're on the five yard line.

[00:14:29] Speaker 04:
That's a single point.

[00:14:30] Speaker 04:
I've never heard a single point referred to as statistics.

[00:14:34] Speaker 03:
It is statistical information, which is what the court calls for.

[00:14:37] Speaker 03:
It's information regarding statistics.

[00:14:39] Speaker 03:
But the board made that determination that it was.

[00:14:41] Speaker 03:
That's a factual determination by the board that was based on, for example, the expert testimony from both sides.

[00:14:49] Speaker 03:
And the board weighed that evidence.

[00:14:51] Speaker 04:
I don't understand.

[00:14:52] Speaker 04:
You're saying, so your argument,

[00:14:55] Speaker 04:
When the board said it was deciding that the stats reference anticipated, it said, accepting his claim construction, it anticipates.

[00:15:05] Speaker 04:
His claim construction doesn't include the idea that statistical information includes a single data point.

[00:15:11] Speaker 04:
So the board did not make a fact finding that statistical information includes a single data point, because they predicated that sentence with accepting his claim construction, which doesn't concede that point.

[00:15:26] Speaker 03:
Well, I'm not sure that that's correct.

[00:15:30] Speaker 03:
The board found that that would be statistical information, right?

[00:15:34] Speaker 03:
The third and five from the team's own 27 yard line.

[00:15:39] Speaker 03:
That's something that's not just a single data point.

[00:15:42] Speaker 03:
There was a run for five yards that was entered that preceded that.

[00:15:45] Speaker 03:
Presumably that is a statistic.

[00:15:47] Speaker 03:
The specific example in the stats football reference talks about Thurman Thomas, the Buffalo Bills running back, who runs for five yards.

[00:15:55] Speaker 03:
That, I would say, is a statistic as well.

[00:15:58] Speaker 03:
Certainly, it's statistical information, which is based on the input of data.

[00:16:02] Speaker 03:
And I think that the board's determination here was based, for example, on the expert testimony.

[00:16:10] Speaker 03:
And it constitutes substantial evidence that supports that factual determination.

[00:16:22] Speaker 03:
The board's construction, however, was supported also by intrinsic evidence and extrinsic evidence.

[00:16:28] Speaker 03:
So turning to the issue of the board's construction of statistical information, at page 822, the board determined that statistical information based on such inputted data, as described and claimed in the 107 patent, does not exclude the inputted data itself.

[00:16:48] Speaker 03:
This is based on intrinsic evidence and extrinsic.

[00:16:51] Speaker 03:
The intrinsic evidence includes the claim language itself and specification, including the abstract, which refers to this data being transferred.

[00:16:59] Speaker 03:
And it also has many examples of entering statistics into the device.

[00:17:04] Speaker 03:
With turning your attention to column six of the 107 patent, there are many examples of these statistics being entered, such as a goal, shot, a turnover.

[00:17:15] Speaker 00:
How do you know they're statistics?

[00:17:16] Speaker 00:
Is it because this is

[00:17:18] Speaker 00:
It has enter game statistics as a heading before this section of the patent.

[00:17:23] Speaker 03:
I would certainly think that that section title, enter game statistics, is indicative that these are statistics.

[00:17:29] Speaker 03:
I also think that if a goal is scored, for example, that seems to me a pretty basic statistic.

[00:17:35] Speaker 03:
In addition, again, the expert testimony here, I know Stats is expert, specifically found these things to be statistics.

[00:17:41] Speaker 03:
They would be considered statistics by person of skill in VR.

[00:17:46] Speaker 00:
And are these single events, or are they involved calculations, or are they just a single event, like score a goal?

[00:17:55] Speaker 03:
Many of them are maybe single events.

[00:17:57] Speaker 03:
There may be calculations that happen as well.

[00:17:59] Speaker 03:
The specification does not give any examples of calculating, which makes this a little difficult to determine.

[00:18:06] Speaker 01:
In essence, what the experts seem to say is,

[00:18:11] Speaker 01:
After the game, somebody says, what are the stats?

[00:18:14] Speaker 01:
And they say, well, three goals were scored.

[00:18:17] Speaker 03:
Potentially.

[00:18:18] Speaker 03:
That's certainly one of the uses of this information.

[00:18:22] Speaker 03:
The specification also talks about linking to a scoreboard.

[00:18:25] Speaker 03:
So it's just statistics are displayed on the scoreboard, which I would include things like a goal was scored.

[00:18:31] Speaker 03:
And that would be reflected on the scoreboard as well.

[00:18:34] Speaker 03:
The addressing cut on the appellant's argument

[00:18:40] Speaker 03:
The 107 patent specification shows that the board's construction does not equate statistical information with the inputted data.

[00:18:48] Speaker 03:
They can be separate things, but they can overlap.

[00:18:51] Speaker 00:
Can I ask you a question?

[00:18:52] Speaker 00:
I just want to go back for a second again on whether statistical information includes being on the five yard line.

[00:18:59] Speaker 00:
Do you think that the section of the patent at column six, lines 36 through 42, where it's talking about, albeit in the context of hockey, being where the shot was taken from?

[00:19:10] Speaker 00:
Do you think that that is referring to where the shot was taken from?

[00:19:13] Speaker 00:
Do you think that section of the pattern is referring to that as a statistic?

[00:19:17] Speaker 03:
I do believe that those are considered statistics that are entered and would be transferred.

[00:19:21] Speaker 03:
In fact, I'm pointing to that column.

[00:19:25] Speaker 03:
That particular section lists seven specific types of statistics that are entered by the user.

[00:19:29] Speaker 03:
No calculations performed on them before they're transferred.

[00:19:34] Speaker 03:
To accept Hockeyline's position here would be to omit all of these numerous

[00:19:39] Speaker 03:
examples of statistical information being entered from column six.

[00:19:43] Speaker 03:
And Hockeyline's interpretation would not include that preferred embodiment within the scope of its claim.

[00:19:49] Speaker 03:
We don't think that can be correct.

[00:19:56] Speaker 03:
I would also note that in the underlying litigation between the parties, Hockeyline contended that stats infringed claim one by transferring the collected data itself untransformed

[00:20:09] Speaker 03:
to a central database.

[00:20:11] Speaker 03:
So again, we submit the broadest reasonable interpretation here should certainly include what Hakelin argued as the district portfolio.

[00:20:19] Speaker 01:
After the game again, someone would say how it took seven shots from behind the blue line, and that would be statistical information, i.e.

[00:20:31] Speaker 01:
from whence the shot was taken.

[00:20:34] Speaker 03:
That certainly could be statistical information, and that could be based on the data.

[00:20:39] Speaker 03:
but also the actual input of a statistic such as how it scored a goal and who assisted on the goal.

[00:20:45] Speaker 03:
And so on the other things that are mentioned in column 6, those would be statistics as well.

[00:20:50] Speaker 03:
And as Judge Stolt noted before, the based on could simply be filtering out particular statistics that are not transferred up.

[00:20:57] Speaker 03:
That would be sufficient for based on.

[00:21:00] Speaker 03:
Because the specification lacks the disclosure of any particular algorithm for how that calculation of statistics may happen,

[00:21:08] Speaker 03:
It needs to be broad enough to include all the possible ways of calculating statistics, which could be simply filtering them before they're being sent.

[00:21:19] Speaker 04:
Your argument seems quite clear.

[00:21:20] Speaker 04:
Do you have anything else you'd like to argue?

[00:21:23] Speaker 03:
I would add, I guess, one issue in the remaining time that I have.

[00:21:30] Speaker 03:
I'll note that the dependent claims 8, 10 to 12, and 30 were found by the board to be obvious.

[00:21:37] Speaker 03:
over the combination of stats football and the Riley reference.

[00:21:41] Speaker 03:
Hockeyline expressly acknowledges the board's obviousness finding in its statement of the case on page two of its opening brief.

[00:21:49] Speaker 03:
But in its statement of the issues for appeal, on page one, Hockeyline lists only the issue of anticipation, and it leaps out the obviousness finding.

[00:21:57] Speaker 03:
So our position is the Hockeyline has not appealed the finding of obviousness.

[00:22:02] Speaker 03:
And for at least that reason, we would submit that it be affirmed.

[00:22:05] Speaker 03:
even in the event that the board's other findings are not approved.

[00:22:12] Speaker 03:
Any more questions?

[00:22:13] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:22:13] Speaker 04:
That's fine.

[00:22:16] Speaker 04:
Mr. Angel, you have some rebuttal time left.

[00:22:22] Speaker 02:
Thank you.

[00:22:22] Speaker 02:
May it please the court.

[00:22:26] Speaker 01:
You got my statistic for me?

[00:22:28] Speaker 02:
I do, Your Honor.

[00:22:31] Speaker 02:
And I would point you to A496 and 497 of our patent owner response brief.

[00:22:40] Speaker 03:
Thank you.

[00:22:42] Speaker 02:
You're welcome.

[00:22:42] Speaker 02:
And I'd like to respond to a comment made by Mr. Bagelsen about the factual finding of game state information.

[00:22:52] Speaker 02:
He said that the board's claim construction was supported by substantial evidence, and he pointed to Dr. DeBora's

[00:22:58] Speaker 02:
testimony that was submitted in connection with Stats's reply brief.

[00:23:02] Speaker 02:
Dr. DeBora did not testify that game state information is statistical information.

[00:23:07] Speaker 02:
That's not a part of his declaration.

[00:23:09] Speaker 02:
He sort of goes up to the line, but he does not make that statement.

[00:23:12] Speaker 02:
So there's not sufficient evidence to support a finding that game state information is statistical information.

[00:23:23] Speaker 02:
Judge Stoll also asked about the game statistics section of the specification and whether that section of the specification mentioning the entry of game statistics means that statistics can include inputted data.

[00:23:40] Speaker 02:
The answer to that is no, it can't.

[00:23:42] Speaker 02:
That is something from the specification and to limit the claim terms based on that part of the specification would be to import a limitation

[00:23:50] Speaker 02:
from the spec to limit it.

[00:23:52] Speaker 00:
I mean if statistics include input data and also data that's calculated from that input data, how would that be limiting the meaning or excluding something from the specification or reading in from the specification?

[00:24:07] Speaker 02:
Because what that does is it changes the use of the term statistical information as it appears in claim one.

[00:24:15] Speaker 02:
So in claim one it says

[00:24:17] Speaker 02:
that the statistical information must be based on the inputted data.

[00:24:21] Speaker 02:
And if that portion of the specification is used to change statistical information as it's used in claim one from something that's other than a category of information based on the inputted data, then it is importing a limitation from the specification.

[00:24:38] Speaker 02:
And it's changing the meaning of statistical information as it's used in the claim.

[00:24:46] Speaker 02:
Mr. Fagelson also referenced the district court proceedings when he said that Hockeyline referred to the transfer of data from the machine to the central server and that Hockeyline had taken the position that inputted data could be a part of statistical information.

[00:25:08] Speaker 02:
That's not correct.

[00:25:10] Speaker 02:
Hockeyline never took that position.

[00:25:12] Speaker 02:
What he's referring to was not a claim construction that Hockeyline offered.

[00:25:16] Speaker 02:
It was something out of the infringement contentions.

[00:25:18] Speaker 02:
Infringement contentions are not claim constructions.

[00:25:24] Speaker 02:
Judge Wallach asked about, or there was a discussion with Mr. Fagelson about algorithms and whether specific calculations had to be disclosed in the specification.

[00:25:35] Speaker 02:
The specification says that calculations of game statistics

[00:25:39] Speaker 02:
are well known to those of skill in the art.

[00:25:42] Speaker 02:
So it's not necessary to write down how to calculate a batting average when everyone knows how to calculate a batting average, or goals against average, or any other common statistics in a sports game, like what this device would be used to help calculate.

[00:26:00] Speaker 02:
If there are no other questions.

[00:26:03] Speaker 04:
OK.

[00:26:03] Speaker 04:
Thank you, Mr. Angel.

[00:26:04] Speaker 04:
I thank both counsel for their arguments.

[00:26:06] Speaker 04:
This case is taken under submission.