[00:00:03] Speaker 00:
He is listening to the arguments from chambers.

[00:00:07] Speaker 00:
And if there is something that he needs to communicate to us, I trust we'll hear from him.

[00:00:14] Speaker 00:
But he will participate in the decision and will be fully listening to what you have to say.

[00:00:24] Speaker 00:
The first argued case this morning is Quest Licensing Corporation against Bloomberg LP, Mr. Fabricant.

[00:00:34] Speaker 03:
Good morning, Your Honors.

[00:00:37] Speaker 03:
So we are here on an appeal from the granting of summary judgment of non-infringement by the district court in Delaware.

[00:00:45] Speaker 03:
And the summary judgment decision was based on the claim construction of the district court with respect to a critical claim term, changing information.

[00:00:59] Speaker 02:
Do you agree that if we affirm the construction of changing information,

[00:01:04] Speaker 02:
and disagree with you that there's a meaningful dispute of fact under the definition that the district court came up with, that your arguments for other claim limitation terms like mobile telecommunications network are irrelevant?

[00:01:23] Speaker 03:
Well, they're irrelevant if they're not irrelevant to trying to get a reversal of that construction because the patent would still be a valid and enforceable patent.

[00:01:34] Speaker 03:
And we certainly would like to correct what we believe is a mistake with respect to the construction of mobile telecommunication network, which we don't believe should have been limited to GSM.

[00:01:43] Speaker 03:
So we certainly would like to proceed with obtaining the correct construction.

[00:01:49] Speaker 02:
Or would they be irrelevant to our decision-making on this case?

[00:01:52] Speaker 02:
It would be irrelevant to your decision-making if you affirm the dismissal of the case based on the grant of summary judgment.

[00:01:59] Speaker 02:
On pages 25 and 26 of the blue brick, you quote the district court, where

[00:02:04] Speaker 02:
Judge said, I may well have considered, in light of what I've heard today, some of your arguments.

[00:02:12] Speaker 02:
But because they were presented, quote, on the eve of trial, the court rolled in favor of the appellees.

[00:02:20] Speaker 02:
This is commentary from a hearing.

[00:02:24] Speaker 02:
What authority do you have that has any evidentiary value at all?

[00:02:31] Speaker 03:
It's not certainly.

[00:02:32] Speaker 03:
dispositive of the issues, Your Honor.

[00:02:34] Speaker 03:
I think what was important, and the reason we included it in the record, is the fact that we believe the judge's critical mistake was that if you look at the exemplary first claim for relief, the first claim, which everyone agreed in the case was exemplary of the apparatus claims, and then you look at the first two elements, the receiving means for receiving changing information, the construction cannot be right.

[00:02:58] Speaker 03:
Because there was no dispute that when the information provider

[00:03:01] Speaker 03:
What does that have to do with my question?

[00:03:03] Speaker 03:
Well, I believe at the oral argument on summary judgment, I believe that Judge Sleet finally understood that and actually came, I believe, to the conclusion that he thought his construction may have been correct.

[00:03:19] Speaker 03:
Is that, is that, is that?

[00:03:21] Speaker 02:
Is that kind of speculation?

[00:03:23] Speaker 02:
I mean, I couldn't, I was a child judge for 16 years and I felt free to just

[00:03:28] Speaker 02:
blather on the bench, securing the knowledge that that's all it was.

[00:03:34] Speaker 03:
Your Honor, this is a de novo review of construction, so it has no meaningful dispositive weight here.

[00:03:40] Speaker 03:
And we need to convince this panel that the construction was in error.

[00:03:46] Speaker 02:
You asked for a construction of price information has been updated.

[00:03:56] Speaker 02:
How is this any different from the

[00:03:58] Speaker 02:
district court's construction of information that has changed?

[00:04:02] Speaker 03:
Well, the word only is the key to the court's construction, which we believe was in error.

[00:04:08] Speaker 03:
By putting in only the way the court then applied his own construction on summary judgment, nothing could accompany the updated data except the price that was changing itself.

[00:04:22] Speaker 02:
And if the court looks at this court... Well, on page 34 of the blueprint, you say

[00:04:27] Speaker 02:
Only the data that has changed for a specific contract will be sent to the subscriber's computer.

[00:04:36] Speaker 02:
Isn't that a concession that the term changing information refers to only information that has changed?

[00:04:43] Speaker 03:
No, Your Honor, because the information received from the information provider is updated data.

[00:04:51] Speaker 03:
It has changed.

[00:04:52] Speaker 03:
That's what the information provider provides to the service provider.

[00:04:55] Speaker 03:
So that when Standard & Poor's sends on high-speed satellite network everything that's updated, it has changed.

[00:05:03] Speaker 03:
The novelty of this patent, if you look at the seventh element of the first claim, is that only the information of interest to that particular subscriber of the changed information goes to the subscriber.

[00:05:16] Speaker 03:
And there are examples, for example, as an express example in the CPM, that if all the NASDAQ information is sent, but the subscriber is only interested in five stocks,

[00:05:26] Speaker 03:
then the updates for those five stocks, and only the updates for those five stocks, percent.

[00:05:31] Speaker 03:
That doesn't mean that the price is separated from the symbol, which is part of the data field.

[00:05:36] Speaker 03:
The symbol is never updated, is it?

[00:05:38] Speaker 03:
The symbol is never updated, but Your Honor, the data field, the price comes in a data field.

[00:05:44] Speaker 03:
It's not price, it's not a number, it's the opening price, it's the closing price, it's the volume, it's the stock symbol, it's the exchange ID, and if Your Honor looks at figure A,

[00:05:55] Speaker 03:
The package that is sent is a data field.

[00:05:58] Speaker 03:
And within the data field, there are files.

[00:06:02] Speaker 03:
And all of those files, what this judge did was he construed down to the level of only certain files from the price data can go or not go.

[00:06:11] Speaker 03:
And that was a mistake.

[00:06:12] Speaker 03:
And, Your Honor, when you look at the claims, elements one and two of claim one, elements one and two, then immediately you know the construction was wrong.

[00:06:20] Speaker 03:
Because if you apply only data that has changed, and it can't include stocks and

[00:06:25] Speaker 03:
then no information can come down.

[00:06:27] Speaker 02:
What's the difference between first receiving means and second receiving means in 21?

[00:06:35] Speaker 03:
There are, Your Honor, in the figure of the patent, there are two paths.

[00:06:44] Speaker 03:
This is a dual path.

[00:06:46] Speaker 03:
The system is an information provider with two receiving means, a CSP-1 and a CSP-2.

[00:06:54] Speaker 03:
The secret of this invention, the novelty, is that all of the real-time data goes through CSP1 directly to the demand engine server, where it looks to see what five stocks your honor is interested in in its profile, and then sends only the updates that came in from the information provider to the subscriber.

[00:07:14] Speaker 03:
The second pathway, which is CSP2, does something different.

[00:07:18] Speaker 03:
The second pathway sends the same information with all the updated

[00:07:23] Speaker 03:
and the stock symbol and the exchange code, but it stores all that information in a data data store 55 on the second pathway.

[00:07:31] Speaker 03:
And what that's for is that's for the other novelty feature of this invention, which is transient wireless connection.

[00:07:37] Speaker 03:
If the subscriber gets disconnected, and as soon as he reinitializes, it will go to the data data store on the second path, and it'll have all of the updated data.

[00:07:47] Speaker 03:
So that's the two pathways, CSP1 and CSP2.

[00:07:51] Speaker 03:
Everything goes through.

[00:07:57] Speaker 03:
So the issue really is, and the appellees concede, that the term changing information must be applied consistently throughout the claim, throughout the patents and the claims of the patents.

[00:08:11] Speaker 03:
If only the data that has changed excludes stock symbols and exchange code, then no information can be received from the information provider.

[00:08:21] Speaker 03:
The record is clear that the information provider always sends the packets.

[00:08:26] Speaker 03:
And the packet information is set forth in Figure 8, where you can see in Figure 8 what the packets look like.

[00:08:33] Speaker 03:
And they contain all of the different types of packet information relative to price, including the simple and the exchange code.

[00:08:43] Speaker 00:
So if the subscriber then says, oh, and by the way, I'm also interested in this sixth stock.

[00:08:50] Speaker 00:
And then the system in the exchange searches its database.

[00:08:54] Speaker 00:
and sends the information on the sixth stock.

[00:08:57] Speaker 00:
Where would that fit in your claims?

[00:09:01] Speaker 03:
The subscriber communicates with the demand engine server, which is on that CSP-1 path, the top path, and sends the initial information, here is another stock that I would like information on.

[00:09:14] Speaker 03:
And then that pulls from the data store, which is in the second path, all of the updated data which has been received, and sends only the information

[00:09:24] Speaker 03:
which the subscriber is interested in to the subscriber.

[00:09:27] Speaker 03:
Now, I think where the district court got hung up on the conservation of bandwidth, well, this does tremendously conserve bandwidth because we're talking about every stock from every exchange being updated and coming into the CSPs, everything, but only five or 10 or 15 stocks or whatever it is the subscriber wants to see that gets delivered by mobile.

[00:09:52] Speaker 00:
There's been enormous changes in bandwidth and capabilities since the application filing date.

[00:10:00] Speaker 00:
But it would seem in order to avoid some of the obvious concerns under Section 101 and everything else, I'll just get stuck information from the cloud.

[00:10:12] Speaker 00:
But you need the restrictions that were present when this application was filed.

[00:10:18] Speaker 03:
Well, Your Honor, there have been improvements in bandwidth and mobile telecommunications.

[00:10:22] Speaker 03:
There's no question about that.

[00:10:23] Speaker 03:
But there have also been tremendous increases in the volume of the content delivered.

[00:10:30] Speaker 03:
I mean, think about movies coming down and huge packages of data.

[00:10:34] Speaker 03:
So while mobile speeds have come up, the reason you often can't get very good downloads is because even today, even with 4G, it's still slow compared to a dedicated network.

[00:10:45] Speaker 03:
Something very important else I'd like the Court to understand

[00:10:48] Speaker 03:
When the information provider sends these updated information to the service provider, that's Bloomberg or Schwab, the information provider doesn't know or care what they're going to do with the information.

[00:10:58] Speaker 03:
They don't know if they're going to send it over mobile.

[00:11:00] Speaker 03:
They don't know whether it's going to be sent by dedicated high-speed T1 connection to traders.

[00:11:06] Speaker 03:
They don't know.

[00:11:07] Speaker 03:
It all comes in.

[00:11:08] Speaker 03:
It all updates.

[00:11:10] Speaker 03:
And then this invention discloses that... You say this invention.

[00:11:15] Speaker 00:
What is the invention?

[00:11:17] Speaker 03:
the invention is two-fold.

[00:11:19] Speaker 03:
It is being able to tell the demand engine server what it is that the subscriber wants to see, and only what the subscriber wants to see, and only receiving delivery of that constantly updating information to those stocks in the profile.

[00:11:36] Speaker 03:
And it's also being able to, at an instant, restock the entire profile with updated information in the event that there's a disconnection of the mobile device.

[00:11:47] Speaker 03:
We do think it's novel, yes.

[00:11:49] Speaker 03:
And we believe that, you know, obviously the CBM, the proceeding in the patent office, the PTAB, denied the petition on CBM.

[00:11:59] Speaker 03:
And we do think it's novel.

[00:12:01] Speaker 03:
In fact, we don't think there's strong prior grant whatsoever.

[00:12:03] Speaker 03:
This is a very early priority date.

[00:12:06] Speaker 00:
And at the time... Is there a relation to CBM in this case?

[00:12:09] Speaker 03:
I'm sorry?

[00:12:11] Speaker 00:
You're using an example of CBM for what purpose?

[00:12:15] Speaker 03:
No, the defendants brought a CBM petition.

[00:12:19] Speaker 03:
Yes.

[00:12:19] Speaker 03:
And it was denied.

[00:12:22] Speaker 03:
And the institution of the CBM was denied.

[00:12:25] Speaker 03:
So the arguments were made to the court, to the PTAB.

[00:12:30] Speaker 03:
And we think it is a novel invention.

[00:12:33] Speaker 03:
The combination of the dual pathway is what the PTAB expressly found novel.

[00:12:39] Speaker 02:
Before the district court, Quest said

[00:12:45] Speaker 02:
I'm quoting, the specifications describes a step for parsing the data packet to isolate only the stock price, which was identified as the changing information.

[00:12:59] Speaker 02:
And you distinguish that from information that doesn't change since the date of George Washington's inauguration.

[00:13:06] Speaker 02:
So where's all that other information that you were telling me about, five different

[00:13:15] Speaker 03:
Is it just stock price?

[00:13:18] Speaker 03:
Well, no, because the stock price, if you look at it, figure eight, is in a data field.

[00:13:22] Speaker 03:
And the data field is not just a price, it's all of the information in there.

[00:13:26] Speaker 03:
And there's no teaching or disclosure in this patent about just sending a number.

[00:13:31] Speaker 03:
What I believe the council was referring to at that time is there was a difference that he was arguing between something that could not possibly change, like the birth date of a president, could not ever change,

[00:13:46] Speaker 03:
and other types of information that does not frequently change, but could change, like a stock price, like an exchange, like a company name.

[00:13:54] Speaker 03:
I think that's the point that Council was making at that time.

[00:13:59] Speaker 00:
Thank you.

[00:14:08] Speaker 01:
Yes, may it please the Court, Ed Popolowski for Appellees.

[00:14:13] Speaker 01:
Changing information or changing data?

[00:14:15] Speaker 01:
is an explicit requirement of each of the asserted claims in this case.

[00:14:21] Speaker 01:
The district court correctly construed that explicit requirement to mean only dated that has changed.

[00:14:30] Speaker 00:
If you get a few numbers, I'm reading 32 and a half unless you know what stalk it is.

[00:14:38] Speaker 00:
It's reading this.

[00:14:40] Speaker 00:
Isn't there some sort of implication that it has to be identified with

[00:14:45] Speaker 01:
Yes, Your Honor, let me explain how it's identified with the subscriber.

[00:14:55] Speaker 01:
The first thing that happens here in the description in the patent is that the information for the subscriber has to be initialized.

[00:15:06] Speaker 01:
a storage filter or profile, which is number 14 in figure 3 in the patent, is populated.

[00:15:12] Speaker 01:
So, for example, that can be populated with whatever stocks the subscriber has in mind.

[00:15:20] Speaker 01:
Once that store is populated, then thereafter there is a feed that comes in, in this case in the patent CSP1 or CSP2, of information from, say, standard imports.

[00:15:36] Speaker 01:
That information, according to the patent, post initialization, is only data that has changed.

[00:15:45] Speaker 01:
And then what happens, that changed data goes through a process whereby there's a parser, and this is in Fig.

[00:15:55] Speaker 01:
3 in the patent, and that parser extracts price data.

[00:16:01] Speaker 01:
That's discussed in figure 15A of the patent, which feeds in the S19 in figure 14.

[00:16:08] Speaker 01:
That extracted price data is then connected through a specific subscriber thread that is associated with the change data for those stocks.

[00:16:20] Speaker 01:
That is described in figure 14 and also in figure 17, Your Honor.

[00:16:26] Speaker 01:
Once that connection is made by the system, then it is known

[00:16:31] Speaker 01:
what change data, in this case change prices, go with specific stocks for that subscriber.

[00:16:38] Speaker 01:
The patent then describes Fig 14 and Fig 17, how that change data and only that change data, Your Honor, then goes along the thread to the subscriber.

[00:16:50] Speaker 01:
This is discussed in great detail, commencing at about column 12 in the patent line 12 through column 13, line 30.

[00:17:00] Speaker 01:
And there it's explained that after the price data is extracted and after it is associated with a specific thread associated with a given subscriber, that change price data is sent along that thread to the subscriber.

[00:17:18] Speaker 00:
You have to say what the price refers to.

[00:17:21] Speaker 00:
Wouldn't it be understood that saying you only transmit the change price data

[00:17:28] Speaker 00:
It's understood, Your Honor.

[00:17:33] Speaker 00:
AT&T, Your Honor, for that matter.

[00:17:39] Speaker 02:
AT&T is already sitting there.

[00:17:41] Speaker 01:
Yes, Your Honor.

[00:17:42] Speaker 01:
It's already sitting in store filter 14.

[00:17:46] Speaker 01:
Store filter 14 in Fig 3 of the patent is populated

[00:17:51] Speaker 01:
for each given subscriber on a selective basis with all the data that that subscriber is interested in.

[00:17:57] Speaker 01:
So let's suppose, Your Honor, I'm a subscriber and I like six stocks, and I want to work with Bloomberg, a service provider, or somebody else.

[00:18:05] Speaker 02:
Well, let me, so the already populated AT&T doesn't change.

[00:18:09] Speaker 02:
Correct.

[00:18:10] Speaker 02:
Nor does the GE already populate it.

[00:18:12] Speaker 02:
Correct, Your Honor.

[00:18:12] Speaker 02:
What changes is the two numbers related to the price.

[00:18:15] Speaker 01:
The two numbers get changed because, and they're parsed out,

[00:18:19] Speaker 01:
They're sent into the store for that subscriber.

[00:18:22] Speaker 01:
And then there's a specific thread associated with that.

[00:18:26] Speaker 01:
This is right out of Fig 17, your honor, feeding into Fig 14.

[00:18:30] Speaker 01:
And then once you connect to that thread, it knows the dedicated price changes for those particular stocks then that's sent on to the subscriber.

[00:18:39] Speaker 01:
And your honor, let me just emphasize another point, if I may.

[00:18:44] Speaker 01:
This precise embodiment, which is set forth in the asserted claims,

[00:18:49] Speaker 01:
is described in the patent.

[00:18:51] Speaker 01:
It's talked about in column two in the specification commencing in around line 43, going on to, I'm sorry, column one commencing in around line 43, and going on to column two in around line 43.

[00:19:05] Speaker 01:
And then that description, and in those columns it talks about how it's only the data that's changed that's supplied to the subscriber.

[00:19:19] Speaker 01:
And then if you go on through columns 12 and 13 of the patent, it's clear that coming into the service provider system, whether through CSP-1 or CSP-2.

[00:19:31] Speaker 00:
That's easy.

[00:19:32] Speaker 00:
I didn't interrupt you.

[00:19:33] Speaker 00:
It's easy if you only have one stock, and the subscriber only is interested in one stock.

[00:19:39] Speaker 00:
Suppose he's interested in five stocks, and at least some of them are around the $100 range or whatever.

[00:19:46] Speaker 00:
How is the subscriber?

[00:19:48] Speaker 00:
going to know which of his interests is affected by this communication of a transaction that's taking place on the Singapore Stock Exchange.

[00:20:01] Speaker 01:
The subscriber will access the service provider's database.

[00:20:07] Speaker 01:
The service provider's database will have a store filter, in this case 14 in the pack, which already is populated

[00:20:13] Speaker 01:
with all of the stocks that the subscriber wants to watch, 10, 20, 50, 100.

[00:20:20] Speaker 01:
That's the information that was initialized.

[00:20:22] Speaker 01:
And the subscriber can reinitialize it if he or she wants to.

[00:20:26] Speaker 01:
Once that's established, then what comes into the system is only changed data.

[00:20:32] Speaker 01:
In this case, for example, only price data.

[00:20:35] Speaker 01:
And the patent column 12 and 13 describes how... Does it show an historical price as well?

[00:20:40] Speaker 02:
That is, it's changed.

[00:20:43] Speaker 02:
what is, from what it's changed.

[00:20:48] Speaker 01:
That's not clear in the patent, your honor.

[00:20:51] Speaker 01:
The one thing that is clear is that only the change data is... And the patent describes why in column 13 in context with the specific example, specifically in order to overcome the bandwidth problem on the GSM network.

[00:21:09] Speaker 00:
Was this the only objection?

[00:21:11] Speaker 00:
101 was the subject of a CBMR petition.

[00:21:25] Speaker 01:
As to 102 and 103, those were issues before the district court.

[00:21:31] Speaker 01:
Since we got summary judgment of non-infringement, those issues are not before us today.

[00:21:40] Speaker 02:
Your Honor, can I turn to this?

[00:21:41] Speaker 02:
Well, let me ask you a question.

[00:21:43] Speaker 02:
Can you cite us to a case that says that the prosecution history considered during claim construction includes statements made during prosecution of a child application?

[00:21:56] Speaker 01:
I believe, Your Honor, that Teva case, for example, talks about how statements made in

[00:22:07] Speaker 01:
during prosecution history and related applications can be considered by the court.

[00:22:13] Speaker 01:
And in this instance, Your Honor, Your Honors, in both the 112 related application and the 357 application, both of those have the same specification.

[00:22:25] Speaker 01:
They distinguish between changing and non-changing information.

[00:22:29] Speaker 01:
So for example, in the 112 related application.

[00:22:34] Speaker 02:
But it says related.

[00:22:35] Speaker 01:
Does it refer to a child patent?

[00:22:38] Speaker 01:
Yet there was priority claimed, Your Honor, same specification.

[00:22:41] Speaker 01:
So if I may, for example, Your Honor, on appeal in challenging the rejection of the 112th related application, West told the PTAB, in order to distinguish over the Zussman prior reference, and this is at 3037, 3040, 3061, and 3062,

[00:23:08] Speaker 01:
Quest said, split the incoming stock information into non-changing data like the stock symbol and changing data such as the stock price, unquote.

[00:23:22] Speaker 01:
Another quote.

[00:23:23] Speaker 01:
The non-changing data only has to be communicated once, unquote.

[00:23:28] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, this is precisely how I explain the invention to the court.

[00:23:34] Speaker 01:
The subscriber initializes

[00:23:36] Speaker 01:
you populate the storage filter 14 with the data of interest to the subscriber.

[00:23:43] Speaker 01:
Once that done, only changed data comes into the system, it's parsed.

[00:23:49] Speaker 01:
That parsed change price data is then hooked up by dedicated threads, which give the subscriber the change price data that it wants for that stock, and then it's passed along that thread to the subscriber.

[00:24:03] Speaker 02:
Do you agree or disagree with Mr. Fabrikant's explanation of differences between first-receiving means and second-receiving means?

[00:24:16] Speaker 01:
In essence, yes, Your Honor, but let me be very clear about this.

[00:24:18] Speaker 02:
Wait, wait, wait.

[00:24:19] Speaker 02:
I said do you agree or disagree?

[00:24:21] Speaker 02:
And your answer is in essence, yes.

[00:24:25] Speaker 01:
Let me just finesse it a tad, if I may, Your Honor.

[00:24:28] Speaker 01:
So the CSP2, which is in Fig 2,

[00:24:33] Speaker 01:
That's the change data that goes into the main database and then into the filter.

[00:24:39] Speaker 01:
The CSP-1 goes straight across into the demand engine, which is FIT-3.

[00:24:46] Speaker 01:
That demand engine has another parser in it.

[00:24:49] Speaker 01:
That's the one that extracts the change price data, and that's where I talked about how that's then linked up with the appropriate thread.

[00:24:55] Speaker 01:
This is column 12 to 13 patent.

[00:24:59] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, if I just may quickly turn to

[00:25:02] Speaker 01:
Quest proposed new construction, updated information.

[00:25:08] Speaker 01:
First of all, Your Honor, this is a change in scope.

[00:25:11] Speaker 01:
It's a departure from what Quest told the district court, all the way up to the summary judgment hearing, where it was telling the court that they weren't asking for a change in construction.

[00:25:21] Speaker 01:
Under Quest construction, updated information would in fact include, for example, non-changing information like the stock symbol.

[00:25:31] Speaker 01:
So it will be completely re-rided in construction.

[00:25:33] Speaker 01:
We think it's completely contrary to the specification and to what Quest told the district court and the PTAB in related applications.

[00:25:52] Speaker 00:
Does the court have any other questions?

[00:26:04] Speaker 03:
Your Honor, in Figure 2, I think this is very important, he focused his argument exclusively on what happens downstream from CSP 1 and CSP 2.

[00:26:13] Speaker 03:
Those are the receiving means.

[00:26:15] Speaker 03:
The receiving means have to receive changing information.

[00:26:19] Speaker 03:
He made a long argument, which we don't agree with, in our briefs to explain why, about where the extraction takes place.

[00:26:24] Speaker 03:
It doesn't take place.

[00:26:25] Speaker 03:
There is no compare of updating

[00:26:29] Speaker 03:
and changing information just to take out the updated price in CSP1.

[00:26:35] Speaker 03:
That parser only looks to see whether it's a stock that the subscriber's interested in.

[00:26:40] Speaker 03:
He's conflated track number one CSP1 with what CSP2 is.

[00:26:45] Speaker 03:
By your use of the pronoun, you mean you're on a roll opposing counts.

[00:26:48] Speaker 03:
Yes, yes.

[00:26:50] Speaker 03:
And your Honor, so the important thing is at the dotted line on figure two, what is received, before we even look at the rest of the specification, what's received

[00:26:58] Speaker 03:
has to be changing information.

[00:27:01] Speaker 03:
And therefore, what's received has to be changing information that has stock symbol exchange code.

[00:27:06] Speaker 03:
Stop right there, and then we know that the claim construction can't be wrong.

[00:27:10] Speaker 03:
With respect to the child application, I would just add, these were different claims.

[00:27:17] Speaker 03:
Even a different claim term, the claim term in the child applications is continuously changing information.

[00:27:24] Speaker 03:
And the added claims were directed at the cell phone or the portable computer, the subscriber's device, asking the demand engine server first to send non-changing data and then to send changing data.

[00:27:40] Speaker 03:
And if the court looks in the record at the dependent claims, which were in the application, the dependent claims specifically asked the demand engine changer to update the non-changing data from time to time when appropriate.

[00:27:52] Speaker 03:
It's a different invention.

[00:27:55] Speaker 03:
They're different claim term, continuously changing, not changing.

[00:27:58] Speaker 03:
And it doesn't have the first and second receiving means at all.

[00:28:01] Speaker 03:
Nor does it have this limitation of the first and second receiving means having changing information.

[00:28:07] Speaker 03:
So it's a different invention.

[00:28:09] Speaker 00:
Any more questions?

[00:28:11] Speaker 00:
Any questions?

[00:28:11] Speaker 00:
Thank you.

[00:28:12] Speaker 00:
Thank you very much.