[00:00:00] Speaker 02: The final case for argument this morning is 23-1720, Stratis Audio v. Hedge. [00:00:08] Speaker 01: Well, hello again. [00:00:09] Speaker 01: This will probably be much shorter depending on your questions. [00:00:16] Speaker 02: You're welcome. [00:00:17] Speaker 01: We just talked about the 081 patent, and this appeal is about the 405 patent, and my remarks can be very brief. [00:00:24] Speaker 01: It's another square peg round hole problem with arbitrary board decision making. [00:00:28] Speaker 01: And in this case, [00:00:30] Speaker 01: This regards a piece of prior art called Lee. [00:00:33] Speaker 01: And the board's theory was anticipation by Lee against, I believe it was claims 12 through 16. [00:00:41] Speaker 01: The board's finding for data identifying a specific instance of media content in this case was data identifying, quote unquote, the advertised product or the advertised item. [00:00:55] Speaker 01: That's appendix page 37. [00:00:57] Speaker 01: Advertised item is the verbiage used by the board. [00:01:01] Speaker 01: The grovelment of our appeal is that a can of Coca-Cola or a bottle of shampoo or what have you, that's an item that one can advertise on a radio station. [00:01:12] Speaker 01: That's not media content. [00:01:14] Speaker 01: So this is, again, perhaps it's the lack of substantial evidence where it blends with the arbitrary irrational decision-making, but we believe that it was just [00:01:23] Speaker 01: a reading green bicycle onto a red car. [00:01:26] Speaker 01: It just doesn't make any sense. [00:01:27] Speaker 01: You scratch your head and you don't know where they came from. [00:01:29] Speaker 01: So the board's anticipation of finding was thus erroneous, not based on substantial evidence. [00:01:35] Speaker 01: Arbitrary and capricious in the courts should therefore reverse, and I'd like to reserve the rest of my time for rebuttal unless there are any questions. [00:01:51] Speaker 00: May please the court, Richard Credo, again, this time on behalf of both Volkswagen and Hyundai. [00:01:57] Speaker 00: I think what Stratis is trying to do here is to pluck a single sentence from the board's decision and ask that the court read that sentence without the benefit of the surrounding context and the arguments and evidence that we presented. [00:02:10] Speaker 00: At appendix 37, the board block-quoted our expert's reply declaration testimony, where he summarized the very argument that Stratis now makes on appeal, namely that the button press data only identifies a product and not the underlying ad-related data. [00:02:30] Speaker 00: and he unambiguously disagreed with that argument. [00:02:35] Speaker 00: He pointed to disclosure that is also block quoted from Lee at column 11, line 16, that's also quoted at appendix 37, and he concluded that the button press data, quote, also provides information about the ad content that is the ad-related data, that is the second media content. [00:02:57] Speaker 00: We know that the board agreed with that finding and adopted it as its own, because on the very next page, the board said, based on this record, including the testimony of Dr. Williams, which we credit, we are persuaded the petitioner has demonstrated its burden. [00:03:13] Speaker 00: So what's happening here is that Lee uses the button press data to search through an advertising database. [00:03:21] Speaker 00: And that advertising database includes the ad-related data, not products. [00:03:28] Speaker 00: Stratis and its expert conceded that below at Appendix 474 and Appendix 2518. [00:03:35] Speaker 00: So in order to identify the advertised item, as the board noted, [00:03:39] Speaker 00: Lee's gateway has to look at and identify the underlying ad-related data. [00:03:45] Speaker 00: The point being that Lee's database links the product to the advertisement data, which is what we pointed to all along as the second media content. [00:03:56] Speaker 00: And so the board's finding is supported by substantial evidence, and its analysis en route to its conclusion is reasonably discernible, which is all that is required under the APA. [00:04:09] Speaker 00: Thank you, Your Honors. [00:04:15] Speaker 01: You're going to thank all the parties after this. [00:04:20] Speaker 01: The block quote of the paragraph on page 37 just beneath what our site is calling the finding begins with, indeed, comma, Dr. Williams testifies that. [00:04:32] Speaker 01: And then there's that block quote. [00:04:34] Speaker 01: There's nowhere in any of the subsequent text on this claim limitation [00:04:38] Speaker 01: where the board says, and therefore we expand the finding we just made to also include advertised data. [00:04:44] Speaker 01: It's simply one of those situations this court sees all the time, where the board is quoting positions of parties, perhaps to corroborate a finding that they have made or will make, but doesn't include an endorsement of everything that they're blocking. [00:05:00] Speaker 02: What about the paragraph on page 38? [00:05:03] Speaker 02: Yes. [00:05:04] Speaker 02: Based on this record, blah, blah, blah. [00:05:08] Speaker 01: That doesn't say, I'm going to add, or we the board will add advertising data to the finding of what constitutes the media content. [00:05:19] Speaker 01: Instead, it's just sort of a recapitulation of, and we think on this point petitioners win, the exact words are based on this record, including the testimony of Dr. Williams, which by the way had just also used the term advertised product, had also just done that, [00:05:38] Speaker 01: which we credit, we are persuaded the petitioner has demonstrated that Lee's description of a user pressing a buy or info button on multimedia device 20, which transmits to Gateway Network 30 the location of the vehicle 184, the date and time of the button press, and the channel selected discloses the recited limitation, uniquely identifying data specific to at least the second media content. [00:05:59] Speaker 01: Everything I just read nowhere contains any expansion of the finding they had already made. [00:06:04] Speaker 01: that second media content includes not just advertised item, but also includes advertising data. [00:06:12] Speaker 01: Thank you, Your Honors. [00:06:13] Speaker 01: Again, we ask that this report reverse.