[00:00:33] Speaker 00:
Mr. Hanley.

[00:00:38] Speaker 03:
Good morning, Your Honors.

[00:00:40] Speaker 03:
Walter Hanley for the appellant secation.

[00:00:43] Speaker 03:
What I intend to do, unless the court has all the priorities, is to address the board's errors in construing two phrases in step E of claim one of the 83 patent.

[00:00:56] Speaker 03:
And they are reassigning by said central controller, said remote terminal,

[00:01:00] Speaker 03:
to a different and suitable signaling channel and for communication hence forward.

[00:01:06] Speaker 03:
And if there's enough time, which I doubt, I'll address the board's error in construing step C. I think the board's most glaring mistake in construing the reassigning phrase was failing to give due weight to the prosecution history and specifically the argument that the applicant made in distinguishing the Grauel reference.

[00:01:27] Speaker 03:
The prosecution history here, I think, is the most relevant intrinsic evidence because the reassigning phrase that's at issue, that is the key language of it, reassigning by said central controller, was added in an amendment to distinguish gravel.

[00:01:45] Speaker 02:
Actually, could you go through Figure 6 for me, the left-hand side of Figure 6 of the 883 patent?

[00:01:52] Speaker 03:
I have to find Figure 6.

[00:01:54] Speaker 02:
In that flow chart, there's a box that says reassignment.

[00:01:58] Speaker 02:
And it was hard for me to really decipher what actions are going on, what choices and decision makings are going on in that reassignment box.

[00:02:13] Speaker 03:
I think the answer is, and one can look at the patent that Specter talks about this figure, is that there's a couple of scenarios that are addressed here.

[00:02:26] Speaker 03:
And it starts with the request that's made by the terminal.

[00:02:30] Speaker 03:
So if you have a terminal that is communicating with the central controller, and it is not seeking registration, but is sending a message for some other reason.

[00:02:42] Speaker 02:
The... Yeah, what does registration message mean?

[00:02:46] Speaker 03:
Registration message would be a message seeking to register with the central controller.

[00:02:55] Speaker 02:
In your figure six, registration message, there is a yes, which means yes, the controller can tell that it's requesting registration.

[00:03:04] Speaker 02:
But then there's also a no, which means the controller can tell that the terminal is not requesting registration.

[00:03:11] Speaker 02:
So then registration message must mean something more than just specifically requesting registration.

[00:03:18] Speaker 03:
Yeah.

[00:03:18] Speaker 03:
I think that it's a question mark, but there's no question mark in the box.

[00:03:22] Speaker 03:
Is this a registration message?

[00:03:24] Speaker 03:
And if the answer is yes, then it proceeds down the right side of the diagram.

[00:03:32] Speaker 03:
And if it's not, it proceeds down the left side.

[00:03:35] Speaker 03:
And it will do, if it goes down the left side, there'll be some signal processing, some ascertainment of what the message is about.

[00:03:46] Speaker 03:
And then the central controller in that context, that is where no registration is being requested,

[00:03:53] Speaker 03:
can make some judgment about whether a reassignment should occur of the channel.

[00:03:58] Speaker 03:
And if it does that, the answer is yes.

[00:04:02] Speaker 03:
Then the action proceeds to the lower half of Figure 6, and there are a couple of things that are going on there.

[00:04:09] Speaker 03:
One is it looks about, it looks at the channels that are currently being utilized, and that's Box 200, and determines whether there is some availability on one of those channels for a reassignment

[00:04:23] Speaker 03:
of the requesting remote terminal to one of those channels, or if there is no channel currently available that's currently being utilized, it can select an available channel from a pool of channels that it has.

[00:04:39] Speaker 03:
And if it does either of those two things, then you would end up with box 230.

[00:04:47] Speaker 03:
And that is the assignment or reassignment if the

[00:04:53] Speaker 03:
requesting terminal already has a check.

[00:04:56] Speaker 02:
I'm afraid to ask this question, but I'll ask it anyway since we're here.

[00:05:01] Speaker 02:
What does the box called channel failure processing mean?

[00:05:10] Speaker 03:
I believe that it means that the terminal that is requesting registration is doing so because something happened

[00:05:22] Speaker 03:
with a channel that it was on that caused the channel to be unusable.

[00:05:28] Speaker 03:
And so it goes through some determination relating to that.

[00:05:34] Speaker 03:
So if we go back to the prior box, 150, question, newly registering terminal.

[00:05:40] Speaker 03:
And if the answer is no, it's not a newly registering terminal, then it looks at, did you make this request because there's some channel failure that I need to deal with.

[00:05:51] Speaker 03:
and therefore determine whether or not to give you a different channel.

[00:05:56] Speaker 03:
I think that's what that means, Your Honor.

[00:06:00] Speaker 02:
The patent doesn't really define what it means to be reassigning, does it?

[00:06:06] Speaker 03:
Well, it does.

[00:06:07] Speaker 03:
It doesn't define it in the sense of a stated definition or a lexicographic definition.

[00:06:18] Speaker 03:
But in the patent, reassigning is the

[00:06:21] Speaker 03:
control, central controller directing or causing or actually commanding the remote terminal to tune to a channel that the central controller has decided it should go to.

[00:06:35] Speaker 03:
So that's the action that takes place in the, in the patent.

[00:06:40] Speaker 02:
So why is it that the MPT specifications don't do that?

[00:06:44] Speaker 03:
Because the, or two things, and I think one, one relates to what the specification discloses,

[00:06:51] Speaker 03:
The other relates to what the applicant distinguished in adding this limitation in prosecution.

[00:07:03] Speaker 03:
The MPT specifications do not, and the Board made no finding that the MPT specifications, when the TSC is processing the registration request, has as a consideration some channel that it wants

[00:07:19] Speaker 03:
the remote terminal interacting with it to use.

[00:07:23] Speaker 03:
The board made a finding on that.

[00:07:25] Speaker 02:
The board relied on MPT's registration action as being the same thing as this reassigning limitation.

[00:07:36] Speaker 03:
They did and that's the error because in consideration of what's disclosed and more pointedly in consideration of

[00:07:46] Speaker 03:
what the applicant, how the applicant distinguishes.

[00:07:49] Speaker 02:
Do we know what criteria the TSC controller uses in deciding whether to grant a registration request?

[00:07:58] Speaker 03:
The only thing that's, that is really pertinent, the answer to that is, I don't have a full knowledge of that, but what the MPT specifications describe as it relates to registration is

[00:08:14] Speaker 03:
It's shown in Appendix 1460, Section 10.1.1, and it says two things about registration.

[00:08:22] Speaker 03:
One, it's a method of recording the area, a group of areas where a radio unit is likely to be located in the network.

[00:08:30] Speaker 03:
So it's basically a geographic consideration.

[00:08:34] Speaker 03:
And the second part is, it says a secondary feature is that it provides a means of restricting the service of individual radio units

[00:08:43] Speaker 03:
by allowing the network to deny registration requests.

[00:08:46] Speaker 03:
So that's kind of a vetting or authorization function.

[00:08:49] Speaker 03:
In neither of those, is there any indication that the channel that the request for registration is being communicated on is a factor in making a judgment about to register or not?

[00:09:04] Speaker 02:
There's a discussion in the NPT about area codes.

[00:09:07] Speaker 02:
Correct.

[00:09:08] Speaker 02:
And so what I'm trying to figure out is every single control channel in the NPT

[00:09:13] Speaker 02:
associated with an area code, and any given area code can include more than one control channel.

[00:09:24] Speaker 03:
No such disclosure.

[00:09:27] Speaker 03:
And nothing of that nature was pointed out to the board, and the board made a finding to that effect to connect up the geographic area consideration with some channel consideration.

[00:09:40] Speaker 03:
So it's just

[00:09:42] Speaker 03:
The record is absent any disclosure or discussion in the NPT specs that says, I register you based on the channel that you are using.

[00:09:55] Speaker 00:
Let me take you up 10,000 feet.

[00:10:02] Speaker 00:
Regarding Steffi, I don't see anywhere in the record that you

[00:10:09] Speaker 00:
either requested the PTAB to construe the limitation found in STEP-E or offer to claim construction of your own.

[00:10:18] Speaker 00:
So where is that in the record?

[00:10:20] Speaker 03:
Well, if I can just recap how the bidding went in terms of the arguments before the PTAB.

[00:10:31] Speaker 03:
Pat Notice submitted a petition.

[00:10:34] Speaker 03:
In their petition, they applied STEP-E to the NPT specifications

[00:10:40] Speaker 03:
Secation, the petitioner, rather, Aris submitted a petition.

[00:10:47] Speaker 03:
Secation responded, we said these terms should receive the ordinary meaning, but that's not what you are applying.

[00:10:56] Speaker 03:
In the reply, the petitioner came back and said, we think ordinary meaning applies, but that's not what you are applying.

[00:11:03] Speaker 03:
So there's a disagreement about the ordinary meaning, which

[00:11:08] Speaker 03:
I guess, came to a head at the oral hearing.

[00:11:11] Speaker 03:
And in fact, at the oral hearing, there was some fairly extensive discussion of the construction of reassigning.

[00:11:17] Speaker 02:
And there was argument.

[00:11:18] Speaker 02:
So your conception of ordinary meaning of the reassigning limitation is commanding transfer to a new channel?

[00:11:31] Speaker 03:
Well, it doesn't necessarily need to be by command, but the, but, and, and, and, and Dr. Huygaard, our expert said this.

[00:11:37] Speaker 02:
Authorizing?

[00:11:37] Speaker 02:
I mean, I'm trying to.

[00:11:38] Speaker 03:
The, the, the central controller must direct in some way the remote terminal to go to a particular channel.

[00:11:48] Speaker 03:
So it doesn't need to do it by command.

[00:11:50] Speaker 03:
In fact, as an example, Paris.

[00:11:54] Speaker 02:
And so, what, what is it in the board's construction where you feel like the board

[00:11:59] Speaker 02:
went astray.

[00:12:00] Speaker 02:
Was it where it said something like the controller in the claim in step B doesn't need to know the identity of the channel when it is performing the reassigning step?

[00:12:14] Speaker 03:
Yes, because in order for the central controller to be the director that connects a remote terminal with a specific channel, and that comes out of the argument that was made in prosecution,

[00:12:29] Speaker 03:
The intelligence about what channel the remote terminal should go to needs to be in the central controller.

[00:12:38] Speaker 03:
And the board said the central controller doesn't even need to know the channel.

[00:12:43] Speaker 00:
Right.

[00:12:45] Speaker 00:
Did the PTAB consider or did it state its conclusions?

[00:12:51] Speaker 03:
It stated a conclusion that is a statement that relates to the scope of the term and the statement

[00:12:59] Speaker 03:
was, as I just outlined.

[00:13:01] Speaker 00:
Where's case law precedent that says stating conclusions equates construing claims?

[00:13:08] Speaker 03:
I think we cited a number of cases, and probably one that I would commend to the court, that it actually relates to the waiver argument that's being made.

[00:13:23] Speaker 03:
But in the... You're under butthole time to say enough.

[00:13:29] Speaker 03:
So if I can just provide that citation, Your Honor.

[00:13:32] Speaker 03:
It's in the Entertainer case.

[00:13:35] Speaker 03:
Entertainer, Inc.

[00:13:36] Speaker 03:
versus Hulu, LLC, 660, Fed Appendix, 943, at 947 and 948.

[00:13:44] Speaker 03:
And basically, the court held that there was no waiver where the patent owner's position, this is in the context of a IPR.

[00:13:52] Speaker 03:
The patent owner's position was subsumed in argument, distinguishing art before the board,

[00:13:57] Speaker 03:
And the same was argued on appeal.

[00:13:59] Speaker 02:
Let me ask you another quick question.

[00:14:01] Speaker 02:
If MPT had said, the way we work over here is the radio unit goes to the TSC controller and says, I have confirmed an arrangement with channel XYZ.

[00:14:19] Speaker 02:
May you register me, please, so that I can get onto channel XYZ?

[00:14:24] Speaker 02:
And then the TSC controller says,

[00:14:27] Speaker 02:
Yes, based on the information you give me, I'm granting you a registration.

[00:14:31] Speaker 02:
Would that be reassigning the radio unit to channel XYZ?

[00:14:39] Speaker 03:
If the permission or not relates to the TSC's determination that that is the proper channel, then the answer is yes.

[00:14:50] Speaker 03:
If it's not, and it instead relates to the

[00:14:53] Speaker 03:
purposes of registration that are delineated in the NPT specifications that I just discussed, then the answer would be no.

[00:15:02] Speaker 03:
Okay.

[00:15:02] Speaker 03:
With that, I'll reserve my time.

[00:15:12] Speaker 04:
May it please the Court, Andrew Sommer on behalf of the FLEs.

[00:15:15] Speaker 04:
I'd like to address some of the questions that the panel had

[00:15:18] Speaker 04:
before I dive into my argument about why the board's application of step E to the prior arc was appropriate.

[00:15:26] Speaker 04:
Judge Wallach, you had asked whether there was something in the record that revealed this is being put to the board as a claim construction issue.

[00:15:34] Speaker 04:
We submit that it wasn't.

[00:15:37] Speaker 04:
You need to look no further than the demonstrative slides that were prepared for the purposes of this hearing.

[00:15:42] Speaker 04:
It's in the appendix at 5736.

[00:15:45] Speaker 04:
there is a very clear delineation between what is being presented as, did we prove this fact as to step E, and how the board should construe step C. And we submit that that is really consistent with the way the briefing unfolded.

[00:16:00] Speaker 02:
So both parties were operating under a plain language proposition for this step E?

[00:16:08] Speaker 04:
That's right, Judge Shen.

[00:16:09] Speaker 04:
OK.

[00:16:10] Speaker 02:
So why isn't the plain meaning

[00:16:14] Speaker 02:
reassigning by said central controller, you know, the remote terminal to a, you know, new channel, new and suitable channel.

[00:16:24] Speaker 02:
Why doesn't that require the central controller to recognize and authorize the specific channel to which the terminal is going to be hooking up to?

[00:16:37] Speaker 04:
We don't believe that the plain language of the claim actually requires some recognition by the central controller of the specific channel.

[00:16:44] Speaker 04:
If you look at the language of step E, it's a method step.

[00:16:48] Speaker 04:
It says reassigning.

[00:16:50] Speaker 04:
What's doing this reassigning?

[00:16:51] Speaker 04:
It's a central controller.

[00:16:53] Speaker 04:
What's being reassigned?

[00:16:54] Speaker 04:
A remote terminal.

[00:16:56] Speaker 04:
And where is it being reassigned?

[00:16:58] Speaker 04:
To a different and suitable communications channel.

[00:17:01] Speaker 04:
For what purpose?

[00:17:02] Speaker 04:
For communications henceforward.

[00:17:03] Speaker 04:
So if you look at the plain language of the claim, there's no

[00:17:07] Speaker 04:
knowledge requirement implicit, certainly no command and I think both parties agree on that.

[00:17:12] Speaker 02:
Well, then I don't know what reassigning means.

[00:17:15] Speaker 04:
Well, the board had the same question for us and we actually provided what we understood.

[00:17:20] Speaker 02:
And then the board says that A31, the claim language does not require the central controller to determine the new signaling channel or to know the channel to which the remote terminal is being assigned.

[00:17:34] Speaker 02:
So, you know, let me just

[00:17:38] Speaker 02:
Let's go with a hypothetical.

[00:17:40] Speaker 02:
Let's say I'm a student in school and I'm taking woodshop.

[00:17:45] Speaker 02:
But I don't like my woodshop class anymore and I decide I really want to take beginning trumpet.

[00:17:53] Speaker 02:
So I go to the vice principal and say, well first I go to the music teacher and they say, yeah, okay, you can be a trumpet player.

[00:18:02] Speaker 02:
And then I go to the vice principal and say, you know, I don't want to be in woodshop anymore.

[00:18:07] Speaker 02:
Can I transfer?

[00:18:10] Speaker 02:
And then they say, well, OK, you can transfer.

[00:18:16] Speaker 02:
But the vice principal doesn't know what class I'm transferring to.

[00:18:22] Speaker 02:
And he's just approving the act of transfer.

[00:18:27] Speaker 02:
Can it really be said in that hypothetical that the vice principal has reassigned me to beginning trumpet?

[00:18:35] Speaker 04:
Because you provided the new class, we submit the answer is yes.

[00:18:40] Speaker 04:
And that's exactly what's happening in the NPT specifications.

[00:18:43] Speaker 02:
Right, but I guess my instinct would be the answer is no, because the vice principal has no clue what my new class I'm going to be enrolling in.

[00:18:55] Speaker 02:
He's just granting me the authority to do some kind of transfer.

[00:19:00] Speaker 02:
So that feels a little different than

[00:19:03] Speaker 02:
reassigning me to beginning trumpet.

[00:19:06] Speaker 04:
Well, in the context of claim one, we have step D, which says we're going to determine whether a suitable and different channel is available.

[00:19:14] Speaker 04:
And in your hypothetical, that would be you choosing trumpet and you choosing and going to the music teacher and saying, hey, is the trumpet class available?

[00:19:24] Speaker 04:
Can I go there?

[00:19:25] Speaker 04:
And all you're doing is simply looking for authority from the principal to make that move.

[00:19:31] Speaker 04:
And that's exactly what these radio units in the MPT specification are.

[00:19:35] Speaker 04:
They pick the channel.

[00:19:36] Speaker 04:
It is undisputed on the record below that step D can be performed by the radio units.

[00:19:44] Speaker 04:
And so they can choose their channel, whether or not they actually have to communicate that choice explicitly so that the central controller looks at that channel and says, well, is that the right channel for you?

[00:19:55] Speaker 04:
That's beyond what the claim language actually requires, Your Honor.

[00:19:59] Speaker 02:
So I guess I just need a little more help here and understanding what does it mean for the central controller to reassign a terminal to a new and suitable channel.

[00:20:12] Speaker 02:
Well when you know reassigning to a new and suitable channel at least in one sense suggests that you are authorizing a move

[00:20:28] Speaker 02:
to a particular channel.

[00:20:30] Speaker 02:
And so therefore, if the prior art is simply granting a permission slip to go transfer without knowing the identity of the resulting channel connection, it feels like there's potentially a gap there.

[00:20:48] Speaker 04:
Well, on the prior art, we submit that there actually is no gap, because the radio units are choosing the channel.

[00:20:55] Speaker 04:
And if they're not allowed to access that channel, the response from the central controller is, try something else.

[00:21:01] Speaker 04:
Go out and hunt for yet another channel, and the process just repeats all over again.

[00:21:07] Speaker 04:
So there is, in our minds, no gap based on the prior art in terms of whether that channel authorization or the authorization, the registration acceptance, is a reassignment.

[00:21:21] Speaker 04:
Because it is channel dependent if you look at the scheme of how MPT is set up.

[00:21:26] Speaker 04:
The radio unit will confirm a channel.

[00:21:28] Speaker 04:
It says, this channel looks good to me.

[00:21:30] Speaker 04:
But I don't know if I can use this channel, so I need to check.

[00:21:34] Speaker 04:
I need to check with the principal in your hypothetical.

[00:21:37] Speaker 04:
And if it's OK, it's going to acknowledge it.

[00:21:39] Speaker 01:
It sounds like you're interpreting reassignment as authorization, not reassignment to me.

[00:21:47] Speaker 01:
Well, those two words have very different meanings.

[00:21:50] Speaker 01:
I mean, if part E said,

[00:21:53] Speaker 01:
that the remote terminal would seek authorization from the central controller for a new channel that it had selected, then I can see how the prior art covers that.

[00:22:05] Speaker 01:
But that's not what it says.

[00:22:07] Speaker 01:
It says the central controller reassigns something.

[00:22:11] Speaker 01:
How is giving authorization to somebody to move a channel the same as that entity specifically reassigning it to a different channel?

[00:22:23] Speaker 04:
Well, because the remote terminal has identified this particular candidate channel, and it's saying, can I use this channel?

[00:22:31] Speaker 04:
And yes, that could also be bundled with an authorization or a registration process.

[00:22:36] Speaker 04:
But it is bundled that exact same way in the patent.

[00:22:41] Speaker 04:
What this black box terminal assignment means in the context of this patent, I think, is a bit vague.

[00:22:47] Speaker 04:
But we do know that at the end of the day, through registration or not, in the context of this patent, through authorization or not, that that terminal is ultimately commanded to tune to a different channel.

[00:22:59] Speaker 04:
That is the preferred embodiment.

[00:23:07] Speaker 04:
So in terms of the plain language of step E, we submit that the language here, for communications henceforward...

[00:23:17] Speaker 02:
I can think this through.

[00:23:18] Speaker 02:
You're saying the TSC controller, while it doesn't know the identity of the channel, that's okay because the fact that in TSC, the radio units have already made the prearrangement with the specific channel.

[00:23:37] Speaker 02:
The controller in MPT somehow inherently understands that all of that

[00:23:44] Speaker 02:
lead-up work has occurred, and so by granting the registration, it's in effect reassigning the radio unit to a specific channel?

[00:24:01] Speaker 04:
Yes, it's our position that in the MPT specifications, that radio unit is not reassigned to that new channel.

[00:24:07] Speaker 04:
until it communicate henceforward.

[00:24:09] Speaker 04:
That's what the claim limitation says.

[00:24:11] Speaker 02:
I know it is not reassigned.

[00:24:13] Speaker 02:
I get that.

[00:24:13] Speaker 02:
But the question is, for my purposes, what is doing the reassigning?

[00:24:21] Speaker 02:
So I understand that ultimately, at the end of the MPT process, the radio unit is getting reassigned to a new channel.

[00:24:34] Speaker 02:
I want to get away from the passive voice.

[00:24:36] Speaker 02:
Let's go to active voice.

[00:24:37] Speaker 02:
What is doing the reassigning?

[00:24:39] Speaker 04:
We submitted to the TSC because it is the one with the final say about whether that new channel can be used at all.

[00:24:46] Speaker 04:
We think that that's actually supported by the MPT specifications.

[00:24:50] Speaker 04:
Mr. Hanley quoted a passage found at section 10.1.

[00:24:55] Speaker 04:
This appears at A1460 of the appendix saying that this registration is really a gatekeeper.

[00:25:01] Speaker 04:
It's an authorization step.

[00:25:03] Speaker 04:
And that's the purpose.

[00:25:05] Speaker 04:
But if you read that entire passage under section 10.1, one of its other purposes is to reduce call set up time and control channel loading.

[00:25:15] Speaker 04:
So this is a technique that is used to dictate which control channels these radio units are permitted to do.

[00:25:22] Speaker 04:
And it's the logic in the TSC, the thing that manages the network, that actually performs that step.

[00:25:27] Speaker 02:
Where does it say control channel loading?

[00:25:31] Speaker 02:
In 1460?

[00:25:33] Speaker 04:
Yeah, it's at 1460, your honor.

[00:25:34] Speaker 04:
Just give me just a moment.

[00:25:41] Speaker 04:
Yeah, it's the second sentence of section 10.1.1.

[00:25:45] Speaker 04:
It says, consequently reducing call set up time and control channel loading.

[00:25:51] Speaker 04:
And this is consistent with one of the responses that the TSC can give a radio unit when it looks to register on a particular channel.

[00:25:59] Speaker 04:
And that response is,

[00:26:01] Speaker 04:
Not just your registration is denied, but the network's overloaded.

[00:26:06] Speaker 04:
And that response, the network overloaded response, it's discussed in our briefing, causes that radio unit to yet go out and find another control channel to try this whole process on.

[00:26:17] Speaker 02:
What is your best understanding of what criteria the TSC and the MPT uses in trying to figure out whether to grant or deny a registration request?

[00:26:27] Speaker 04:
I think that leaves it up to the developer of the network.

[00:26:31] Speaker 04:
Network loading is obviously one of those.

[00:26:34] Speaker 04:
Control channel loading, since that's one of the purposes of this registration process.

[00:26:38] Speaker 04:
But exactly what criteria it looks at, these specifications are written from the perspective of the radio unit.

[00:26:45] Speaker 04:
So you design the radio unit to meet the requirements the TSC design is more left up to engineers that are designing the system.

[00:26:57] Speaker 04:
So in terms of the arguments in terms of how we prove that MPT discloses these things, we think that the board's decision is actually sound in this regard.

[00:27:08] Speaker 04:
We don't think that this is really a claim construction issue.

[00:27:11] Speaker 04:
Nobody has proffered what they believe reassigning actually means.

[00:27:15] Speaker 04:
The patent is terse, I think, to say the least, on what a reassignment is.

[00:27:20] Speaker 04:
We think it's a reallocation or a repurposing.

[00:27:23] Speaker 04:
And we told that to the board.

[00:27:24] Speaker 04:
It's not in the board's decision.

[00:27:26] Speaker 04:
I don't think they felt that they needed to reach this particular issue.

[00:27:29] Speaker 04:
But if you're going to allow something to move from one place to another, and the claim language says that that's to a different and suitable channel, then that reassignment has a court.

[00:27:40] Speaker 04:
So we don't think that the patent specification really decides this issue.

[00:27:46] Speaker 04:
In terms of the prosecution history, I know Mr. Hanley wanted to touch on that briefly, and I expect him to when he stands back up.

[00:27:52] Speaker 04:
The growl reference is very different than what MPT is doing because once those criteria on the control channels are changed, the radio units go out and look for those changes to the control channels and will reassign themselves.

[00:28:07] Speaker 04:
There's no additional steps for communication henceforward.

[00:28:10] Speaker 02:
You're talking about growl?

[00:28:11] Speaker 04:
I am.

[00:28:13] Speaker 04:
Okay.

[00:28:13] Speaker 04:
And that particular reference and the statements made in prosecution are very different from the way that we submit that they've been characterized in the reply brief.

[00:28:23] Speaker 04:
It looked to us as if there were some important words cut out of the characterization of growl.

[00:28:30] Speaker 04:
In terms of how they approach the distinction over growl, we submit that there was no definition given to the term reassignment.

[00:28:38] Speaker 04:
All they said was growl reassigns itself.

[00:28:41] Speaker 04:
Our central controller must do the reassignment.

[00:28:44] Speaker 04:
And that was the primary distinction.

[00:28:46] Speaker 04:
There were others in the prosecution history as well, but obviously,

[00:28:49] Speaker 04:
They all deserve consideration here.

[00:28:52] Speaker 04:
We just don't think that those statements made during prosecution exclude what MPT does, because MPT, as a matter of fact, is a very different type of system.

[00:29:03] Speaker 02:
Is there anything in Growl where the controller there does some kind of final blessing or permission?

[00:29:11] Speaker 04:
The word registration appears in Growl, and from my reading of Growl, Growl is around the time of the development of GSM.

[00:29:20] Speaker 04:
and it's a Phillips patent.

[00:29:22] Speaker 04:
So there is a registration process, but this control channel shifting the load balancing that's performed by Growl doesn't really hinge on this whole idea of registration at all.

[00:29:34] Speaker 04:
Once the base station in Growl reassigns those channels, they, or reassigns the codes to the channels, the radio units will go out, find those codes on the different channels, and then use those channels henceforward.

[00:29:49] Speaker 04:
We're submitting that because that happens and then the base station is no longer involved in the process, that there is no reassignment going on.

[00:29:58] Speaker 04:
It's very different than MPT.

[00:30:05] Speaker 04:
With that, I will cede the rest of my time.

[00:30:09] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:30:13] Speaker 03:
Thank you.

[00:30:14] Speaker 03:
Your Honor.

[00:30:15] Speaker 03:
Mr. Summer was correct.

[00:30:16] Speaker 03:
I do want to touch on the prosecution history, because I think it does confirm that, in fact, reassigning does require authorization to go to a particular channel.

[00:30:27] Speaker 03:
The Graal reference discloses a system in which a central controller attaches ranges of group codes to channels.

[00:30:36] Speaker 03:
And then the remote terminals in the system, they each have their own group code stored in memory, and they

[00:30:44] Speaker 03:
scan the channels, and they assign themselves or connect themselves up with the channel that has their group code.

[00:30:51] Speaker 03:
The central controller in that system can cause the remote terminals to move to different channels.

[00:30:57] Speaker 03:
And what it does is it changes the attachments or assignments of the ranges of group codes to the various channels.

[00:31:05] Speaker 03:
And the remote terminals then have to look for their new channel, and they reassign themselves.

[00:31:12] Speaker 03:
What the applicant said was,

[00:31:14] Speaker 03:
The central controller is not reassigning because it doesn't allocate the channel and assign the remote terminal to that channel.

[00:31:26] Speaker 03:
That is, it doesn't connect up a specific remote terminal with a specific channel.

[00:31:30] Speaker 03:
And therefore, I think that supports our construction that the intelligence as to where the remote terminal needs to go, what channel needs to be in the central controller.

[00:31:42] Speaker ?:
Thank you.

[00:31:50] Speaker 02:
Thank you.