[00:00:01] Speaker 01:
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is now open and in session.

[00:00:06] Speaker 01:
God save the United States and this honorable court.

[00:00:11] Speaker 04:
Thank you, and good morning, everyone.

[00:00:13] Speaker 04:
The first argued case for this panel this morning is number 19, 1950, Cannon Incorporated against the ITC.

[00:00:22] Speaker 04:
Mr. Sandinotto, proceed.

[00:00:25] Speaker 01:
Good morning, Your Honors, and may it please the court.

[00:00:28] Speaker 01:
Your Honors, this appeal presents a single question.

[00:00:31] Speaker 01:
Did Cannon disavow coupling members that did not hit it?

[00:00:36] Speaker 01:
And the answer is an systematic no.

[00:00:38] Speaker 01:
And while we see many different flavors of the arguments from all sides, the reason why the answer is no boils down to three basic points.

[00:00:47] Speaker 01:
Number one, the language of the claims could not be clearer.

[00:00:52] Speaker 01:
Everyone agrees that the claim language encompasses both coupling members that hit it and coupling members that move in a straight line.

[00:01:00] Speaker 01:
And in fact,

[00:01:01] Speaker 01:
The ALJ found that the term at issue has a plain and ordinary meaning that does not require pivoting.

[00:01:09] Speaker 01:
Number two, this single sentence in the specification that that is the linchpin of the commission's analysis is not newly exacting unequivocal enough to give rise to this valid.

[00:01:21] Speaker 01:
The sentence simply says, in the present invention, the coupling member can.

[00:01:26] Speaker 01:
It doesn't say the present invention is.

[00:01:28] Speaker 01:
It doesn't say the present invention must have.

[00:01:31] Speaker 01:
There's no statement in the specification or the prosecution history that points to pivoting to distinguish over the prior art or to obtain allowance.

[00:01:40] Speaker 01:
These simply are not the kinds of words of manifest exclusion or restriction that the law requires to find this value.

[00:01:50] Speaker 01:
And then number three, everyone agrees that we have an embodiment in our specification that expressly teaches that straight line movement can be a substitute for pivoting.

[00:02:01] Speaker 01:
We had a little bit of a debate over whether the specification features it.

[00:02:04] Speaker 01:
It can be a complete substitute or just a partial substitute.

[00:02:08] Speaker 01:
But everyone agrees that it can be a substitute, at least at some level.

[00:02:13] Speaker 01:
And so these three points... Council.

[00:02:16] Speaker 01:
Yes, Judge O'Malley.

[00:02:17] Speaker 05:
When you say everyone agrees, I mean, I don't see that there is actual agreement.

[00:02:22] Speaker 05:
When you say a substitute or a partial substitute, the question really is, is there any pivoting that occurs, right?

[00:02:31] Speaker 05:
less of an angle, but the argument is that it's still a pivot, so it's not a substitute in their view.

[00:02:37] Speaker 01:
Well, there's a debate over whether it can be a complete substitute or a partial substitute, but everyone agrees that it's a substitute at least at some level.

[00:02:47] Speaker 01:
And I'll point, for example, to appendix page 29 to 30, where the ALJ found that the specification teaches that the degree the coupling member needs to incline for mounting and dismounting operations

[00:03:01] Speaker 01:
can be reduced by configuring the coupling member to move axially.

[00:03:06] Speaker 02:
Can I just follow up on that?

[00:03:08] Speaker 02:
Why do you think it is relevant to the inquiry we have, including as one part, whether there is even a single embodiment lacking pivoting to say that everybody agrees that

[00:03:24] Speaker 02:
non-pivoting motion can be a substitute at some level.

[00:03:31] Speaker 02:
How does that tend to negate what would otherwise seem apparent that every single embodiment involves pivoting?

[00:03:40] Speaker 01:
Because it's inconsistent to find that canon disavows coupling members that don't pivot when the specification teaches both the desirability and the means

[00:03:51] Speaker 01:
for replacing pivoting.

[00:03:52] Speaker 01:
The specification tells us that if we introduce axial movement into the coupling member, we can replace pivoting.

[00:04:00] Speaker 01:
And again, I acknowledge there's a debate over whether we could completely replace it or partially replace it, but certainly the specification shows both the desirability

[00:04:10] Speaker 01:
of placing pivoting and the means for doing so, i.e.

[00:04:15] Speaker 05:
introducing... Well, let me give you a hypothetical.

[00:04:18] Speaker 05:
If you're tilted at a 45-degree angle, then you're tilted.

[00:04:23] Speaker 05:
But if you're at a 20-degree angle, you're still tilted, right?

[00:04:27] Speaker 01:
And that's correct, Judge O'Malley.

[00:04:30] Speaker 01:
If you're at a 15-degree angle, you're still tilted a little bit as well.

[00:04:34] Speaker 01:
If you're at a 0-degree angle, you're not tilted at all.

[00:04:38] Speaker 01:
And that's one of our points with Embodiment 13.

[00:04:42] Speaker 01:
In Embodiment 13, the angle of tilt, it's called alpha 106, is presented as a variable, as a variable that can take on a range of values.

[00:04:53] Speaker 01:
Now, in the figure, it's shown as a non-zero angle, but there's no reason from the specification to limit it to a non-zero angle.

[00:05:04] Speaker 01:
the specification.

[00:05:05] Speaker 01:
All the specification tells us about this angle is that it needs to be small.

[00:05:11] Speaker 01:
Okay?

[00:05:12] Speaker 01:
Zero is an angle.

[00:05:13] Speaker 01:
In fact, zero is a small angle.

[00:05:15] Speaker 01:
You can't get any smaller than the angle of zero.

[00:05:18] Speaker 01:
So the embodiment 13, the full scope of embodiment 13 is a range of angles, which include zero, up to some non-zero amount that must be small.

[00:05:31] Speaker 05:
So you're saying a small angle

[00:05:33] Speaker 05:
means no angle?

[00:05:35] Speaker 01:
A small angle encompasses no angle, yes.

[00:05:39] Speaker 01:
That's correct.

[00:05:41] Speaker 05:
So where in the specification do you ever use the word movable?

[00:05:47] Speaker 01:
The word itself movable?

[00:05:51] Speaker 01:
Yes.

[00:05:55] Speaker 01:
There's a variety of places, Your Honor.

[00:06:00] Speaker 01:
I would start with

[00:06:03] Speaker 01:
the summary of the invention section, for example.

[00:06:06] Speaker 01:
So at column two, at around line 55, it starts, a further object of the present invention is to provide a process cartridge demountable from the main assembly of an electrophotographic image-forming apparatus.

[00:06:31] Speaker 01:
And then a further object is to provide a drum unit used in the process cartridge that's detachably mounted.

[00:06:39] Speaker 01:
That mounting and dismounting that it's talking about is movement of the cartridge itself.

[00:06:46] Speaker 01:
Then the discussion goes on to explain that the cartridge needs to go into the printer in a perpendicular manner.

[00:06:54] Speaker 01:
And that perpendicular manner creates the need for the coupling member to be movable, to move.

[00:07:01] Speaker 01:
from one position to another.

[00:07:03] Speaker 01:
And the purpose of that is so that the coupling member can get out of the way of the printer drive shaft.

[00:07:20] Speaker 04:
But just to be clear, you're asking now for a claim construction that would include a zero angle.

[00:07:28] Speaker 01:
We're asking for a claim construction.

[00:07:30] Speaker 01:
Yes, we are, Judge Newman.

[00:07:32] Speaker 01:
We're asking for a claim construction that would include a zero angle, that would include a type of movement in which the coupling member doesn't tilt at all and only moves axially.

[00:07:43] Speaker 01:
And that's consistent with the plain and ordinary meaning of the claim term.

[00:07:48] Speaker 01:
And the ALJ acknowledged that.

[00:07:50] Speaker 01:
The ALJ acknowledged that the plain and ordinary meaning encompasses movement that does not include

[00:07:56] Speaker 01:
any angle.

[00:07:57] Speaker 01:
Are you saying we shouldn't look to the spec at all?

[00:08:02] Speaker 01:
No, not at all.

[00:08:03] Speaker 01:
I think the spec is very relevant in the analysis, Judge O'Malley.

[00:08:06] Speaker 05:
Is there anything other than figure 13 or embodiment 13 that you're relying on?

[00:08:15] Speaker 01:
Yes, I would rely on all the references in the specification, especially the statements of the objects of the invention, which characterize the objects

[00:08:26] Speaker 01:
in a manner that is generic to both pivoting coupling members and coupling members that move in a straight line.

[00:08:34] Speaker 01:
When you look to the object of the present invention, none of them are specific to pivoting.

[00:08:40] Speaker 01:
They are all accomplished by coupling members that move both linearly and move by pivoting.

[00:08:46] Speaker 01:
That said, clearly in vitamin 13 is an important part of our argument and our analysis because in vitamin 13, A,

[00:08:56] Speaker 01:
clearly teaches that you can interpose or introduce axial movement to replace pivoting and the full scope of Embodiment 13 embraces the configuration and teaches the configuration in which the coupling member moves only axially.

[00:09:12] Speaker 05:
Okay, you cited me to one portion of the specification and I have to say I don't think that proves your point.

[00:09:20] Speaker 05:
So is there anything else in the specification?

[00:09:24] Speaker 01:
Other than Embodiment 13?

[00:09:27] Speaker 05:
Other than Embodiment 13 and the Column 2 that you pointed to.

[00:09:33] Speaker 01:
Yes, and there are, Your Honor, and these, so I would, for example, look to Column 31 of the specification.

[00:09:40] Speaker 01:
This is that Appendix, Page 206.

[00:09:44] Speaker 01:
Give me a second to get there.

[00:09:46] Speaker 01:
Of course.

[00:09:49] Speaker 01:
Okay.

[00:09:49] Speaker 01:
And this is talking about, this one is talking about embodiment number one.

[00:09:54] Speaker 01:
And this is an embodiment in which the coupling member does pivot.

[00:09:58] Speaker 01:
We acknowledge that in this embodiment, the coupling member does pivot.

[00:10:02] Speaker 01:
But in this embodiment, one of the things it talks about is the engaged position, what it calls the rotational force transmitting position, the position where the two with the coupling member and the printer driveshaft are coupled together.

[00:10:18] Speaker 01:
And what this tells us is that the angle in that position can be anywhere from 0 to 15 degrees.

[00:10:27] Speaker 01:
It says that 0 is preferable, but it could be anywhere from 0 to 15.

[00:10:30] Speaker 05:
OK, what lines are you on?

[00:10:32] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, I'm at around line 42, where it says that's.

[00:10:39] Speaker 01:
Now, please continue.

[00:10:41] Speaker 01:
I went around line 42, it says as to the angle theta 1, zero degrees is preferable.

[00:10:47] Speaker 01:
And this establishes that zero degrees is indeed an angle.

[00:10:53] Speaker 01:
And so this embodiment supports our interpretation of embodiment 13, which again presents the angle alpha as a variable and a variable that can be zero.

[00:11:06] Speaker 05:
But this is a pivoting

[00:11:08] Speaker 01:
This is a pivoting embodiment, right?

[00:11:10] Speaker 01:
This is a pivoting embodiment, yes.

[00:11:11] Speaker 01:
This is certainly a pivoting embodiment, but it establishes that zero degrees is an angle, and I think that that supports our interpretation of embodiment 13 in which the angle alpha is presented as a range, given a variable, but it's characterized as an angle that needs to be small, and zero is, once again, a small angle.

[00:11:35] Speaker 05:
And at this point, you're talking about here after pivoting is completed, right?

[00:11:40] Speaker 01:
Well, in this embodiment, yes.

[00:11:42] Speaker 01:
It's talking about the position once the coupling member and the printer drive shaft are engaged.

[00:11:48] Speaker 01:
That's correct.

[00:11:49] Speaker 01:
OK.

[00:11:49] Speaker 03:
That's correct.

[00:11:53] Speaker 04:
OK.

[00:11:53] Speaker 04:
Let's hear from the other side, and we'll save you rebuttal time.

[00:11:57] Speaker 00:
Thank you, Your Honor.

[00:12:00] Speaker 04:
Mr. Joe Dean.

[00:12:02] Speaker 00:
Thank you.

[00:12:03] Speaker 00:
Good morning, ma'am.

[00:12:04] Speaker 00:
Please report.

[00:12:05] Speaker 00:
Uh, I think I'll just dive right into, uh, reporting, uh, closing cannon's argument.

[00:12:11] Speaker 04:
Yes, please do.

[00:12:12] Speaker 00:
Uh, yeah.

[00:12:13] Speaker 00:
It's basically, it basically hang their hat on a body of a 13 all closed embodiment specification, all 19 expressly required visiting.

[00:12:25] Speaker 00:
This includes, uh, embodied the 19 with the confidence all previously closed embodiment, which includes the president invention statement.

[00:12:33] Speaker 00:
But again, it roughly states that the coupling member has to take these different angular positions, i.e., pivot to accomplish this.

[00:12:45] Speaker 05:
What's your response to your friend's argument that figure 13 shows that zero can be an angle?

[00:12:56] Speaker 00:
Right.

[00:12:56] Speaker 00:
Regarding embodiment 13, there's simply no teaching that zero can be an angle.

[00:13:01] Speaker 00:
In embodiment 13,

[00:13:02] Speaker 00:
simply introduces as a complement only axial motion.

[00:13:07] Speaker 00:
It only complements the pivoting that's required.

[00:13:11] Speaker 00:
Expressly, the specification states that appendix page 222 found 63 lines 43 through 48.

[00:13:21] Speaker 00:
Therefore, the space required by the pivoting motion of a coupling 10510 is small.

[00:13:28] Speaker 00:
Here we have this language.

[00:13:29] Speaker 00:
The space required by the pivoting motion

[00:13:33] Speaker 00:
that clearly states that pivoting is part of this embodiment, as it is with all other 18 disclosed embodiments.

[00:13:40] Speaker 00:
Also, if you go to the figure, figure 88C at appendix page 166, it clearly shows, again, that non-zero angle alpha 106.

[00:13:52] Speaker 00:
There's no teaching that this angle can go to zero.

[00:13:56] Speaker 00:
Again, simply consistent with this court's longstanding precedent,

[00:14:02] Speaker 00:
where claim language cannot be just simply read in a vacuum, has to be read in light of the entire specification.

[00:14:09] Speaker 00:
Here, again, all 19 disclosed embodiments goes toward pivoting, includes the President's invention statement, and there's simply no other interpretation for movable in the claim language plus who means pivoting.

[00:14:25] Speaker 04:
So you agree that it includes axial motion provided there is an angle

[00:14:31] Speaker 00:
Correct.

[00:14:33] Speaker 00:
Pivoting is not eliminated at all.

[00:14:35] Speaker 00:
Pivoting as complemented solely by axiom motion for embodiment 13 is included.

[00:14:42] Speaker 00:
And rather, as you struggle to find movable in the specification, you have more than 90 times specification includes the word pivot with some derivation thereof.

[00:14:53] Speaker 00:
Pivot, pivoted, pivotable, or includes flannable, inclinable, number of times fling, flingable.

[00:15:01] Speaker 00:
that's all throughout the specification describing the required angular position of the coupling member.

[00:15:08] Speaker 04:
But when it's coupled, the result of the coupling is that you do have the axial configuration.

[00:15:15] Speaker 04:
Is that right?

[00:15:18] Speaker 00:
Are you talking about the rotational force transmitting position when it's substantially correct?

[00:15:26] Speaker 00:
Yes.

[00:15:26] Speaker 03:
Yes.

[00:15:27] Speaker 00:
Yes, that is one of the required positions

[00:15:30] Speaker 00:
But one, again, the coupling member is required to pivot between these three required positions as shown throughout the specification and the illustration.

[00:15:41] Speaker 00:
Each illustration, for example, figures 21 through 24, 21 through 25, the appendix pages.

[00:15:56] Speaker 00:
104 through 107, again, all show this angular movement of the pivotal coupling member.

[00:16:02] Speaker 00:
And even in that section describing the smooth transmission, it uses the word substantially coaxial, meaning some small angle of 15 degrees or less.

[00:16:13] Speaker 00:
The appendix page 206, line 31, I'm sorry, column 31, lines 38 through 45, often in the associated figure 25B.

[00:16:21] Speaker 00:
So it still encompasses

[00:16:25] Speaker 00:
some non-zero angle even when you're at the transmissible.

[00:16:30] Speaker 05:
You do, though, have, Council, you do have somewhat, this is Judge O'Malley, I'm sorry, you do have somewhat of an uphill battle in the sense that the ALJ said movable has a common and ordinary meaning that doesn't include pivoting.

[00:16:45] Speaker 05:
So this has to be a disavowal case, and

[00:16:52] Speaker 05:
That requires a lot of showing to overcome the common and ordinary meaning, right?

[00:17:00] Speaker 00:
I think it is shown here, again, consistent with this court's precedent, both the longstanding and more recently, as in tectronic.

[00:17:09] Speaker 00:
When, again, you read the claim language in light of the specification as a whole throughout the specification, it characterizes the invention here as a coupling member

[00:17:20] Speaker 00:
required to move between these three required angular positions, i.e., pivot between these positions and accomplish the claimed invention as well as the benefits of the claimed invention, i.e., to be able to transmit the rotational force from the drive shaft to the toner cartridge smoothly even when it's axial deviation.

[00:17:43] Speaker 00:
This cannot be accomplished in the absence of pivoting.

[00:17:48] Speaker 00:
So similarly here, you have the present invention statement

[00:17:50] Speaker 00:
combined with, throughout the specification, all 1912 embodiments, throughout all illustrations, and there's simply no teaching otherwise that actually a movement alone can accomplish the clinical invention.

[00:18:03] Speaker 05:
Do you need to rely on the fact that the ALJ looked to the 918 Investigation Expert Report as part of the prosecution history for this patent?

[00:18:19] Speaker 00:
No, I think it's just icing on the case for this case.

[00:18:23] Speaker 00:
Certainly, again, with this long-standing precedent, content of IDS can be used to determine claims scope.

[00:18:31] Speaker 00:
And clearly, in the expert report, it transfers the argument against invalidity stating that it requires pivoting, quote.

[00:18:44] Speaker 05:
But they were talking about different claims, right?

[00:18:48] Speaker 00:
different claims, but still the same common specification and still going towards what is the essence of the invention here.

[00:18:55] Speaker 00:
And it's to a coupling member that takes, required to take these different angular positions, i.e.

[00:19:01] Speaker 00:
pivot between them in order to accomplish the claimed invention of easy engagement between the toner cartridge and the drive shaft of the printer.

[00:19:13] Speaker 00:
And that's that appendix page 196

[00:19:16] Speaker 00:
9-2 paragraph 5, which clearly states the expert's argument that pivots can be kept coaxing with the driveshaft as the coupling member and driveshaft become fully engaged.

[00:19:30] Speaker 00:
So here you have, again, the system with precedent.

[00:19:34] Speaker 00:
You have the present invention statement.

[00:19:35] Speaker 00:
You have all closed embodiments going towards pivoting, all illustrations, nothing to the contrary.

[00:19:43] Speaker 00:
The only thing they hang their hat on is in vitamin 13, which again requires pivoting expressly.

[00:19:48] Speaker 00:
There's just simply no teaching whatsoever.

[00:19:51] Speaker 00:
There can be no other interpretation immovable in the claim language.

[00:19:55] Speaker 00:
It has to be interpreted, not in the backing, but in context of the specification as a whole, that pivoting is required here for the coupling member.

[00:20:09] Speaker 00:
Is there any?

[00:20:11] Speaker 00:
Thank you.

[00:20:12] Speaker 04:
Okay, thank you.

[00:20:13] Speaker 04:
We will hear from Ms.

[00:20:15] Speaker 04:
Saharsky.

[00:20:17] Speaker 06:
Good morning and may it please the court.

[00:20:20] Speaker 06:
The ALJ and the ITC got it right.

[00:20:22] Speaker 06:
This is a textbook case of disavowal.

[00:20:24] Speaker 06:
I'd like to talk about what the ALJ relied on first and then move to some of Cannon's arguments.

[00:20:29] Speaker 06:
The ALJ found, consistent with this court's precedent, that the specification consistently and repeatedly describes only a pivotable coupling number.

[00:20:38] Speaker 06:
And Cannon's wrong to say that the ALJ just relied on one single set

[00:20:42] Speaker 06:
ALJ relied on, I'd say at least five things.

[00:20:45] Speaker 06:
First, the fact that all 19 embodiments show a pivotable coupling member, and that number 19, which says that it's describing all of the embodiment, says the coupling member had to be pivotable.

[00:20:58] Speaker 06:
Two, the present invention language, which comes after all of those embodiments.

[00:21:03] Speaker 06:
Three, the fact that all of the figures that show the coupling member show it pivoting.

[00:21:09] Speaker 06:
Four,

[00:21:10] Speaker 06:
the number of times over 370 that the specification refers to pivoting, inclining, swinging.

[00:21:17] Speaker 06:
And then fifth, just the fact that it never says here in the specification nowhere in this long, long patent that the coupling member need not pivot.

[00:21:26] Speaker 06:
So that's the package that shows the disavowal.

[00:21:30] Speaker 06:
I think the court's questions, I think, have focused mostly on embodiment 13.

[00:21:33] Speaker 06:
So I think I just wanted to address that briefly.

[00:21:36] Speaker 06:
The problem really from Cannon's perspective is both what embodiment says and what it shows, and then essentially the problems why axial only movement doesn't work on embodiment 13.

[00:21:49] Speaker 06:
And so I know the court's discussed it a little bit already, but I just want to make sure that the language is before the court.

[00:21:54] Speaker 06:
You know, if you look at, this is on page appendix 222, column 63, in detail,

[00:22:01] Speaker 06:
This is providing an explanation in embodiment 13.

[00:22:05] Speaker 06:
What line are you at?

[00:22:08] Speaker 06:
I'm sorry.

[00:22:09] Speaker 06:
I'm on page 222, column 63.

[00:22:13] Speaker 06:
And I'm starting at line, I would say, 38.

[00:22:15] Speaker 06:
OK.

[00:22:17] Speaker 06:
And so here, this paragraph and then the paragraphs that follow talk about engagement.

[00:22:23] Speaker 06:
And then it talks about disengagement.

[00:22:25] Speaker 06:
So if you look around line 38, it says, the movement in the direction of axis L2

[00:22:32] Speaker 06:
which is the axial, and the pivoting motion, swinging operation, are combined.

[00:22:38] Speaker 06:
And the coupling is swung from the pre-engagement angular position to the rotational force transmitting angular position.

[00:22:45] Speaker 06:
So that says when it's engaged, it pivots.

[00:22:48] Speaker 06:
And the pictures, figures 87 and 88, show that.

[00:22:52] Speaker 06:
But then it also discusses, and then there's this middle paragraph, which the ITC's council referred to, that talks about how there's space required by the pivoting motion

[00:23:01] Speaker 06:
i.e.

[00:23:02] Speaker 06:
that you have to have the pivoting motion that's required.

[00:23:05] Speaker 06:
And then this next paragraph, which starts around line 49, talks about disengagement.

[00:23:10] Speaker 06:
And this is around line 57.

[00:23:14] Speaker 06:
It says where the coupling is demounted from the drive shaft.

[00:23:18] Speaker 06:
It says the moving operation in the direction of axis L2 and the pivoting motion are combined.

[00:23:25] Speaker 06:
And then the coupling's pivoted.

[00:23:27] Speaker 06:
So both for engagement and the disengagement,

[00:23:30] Speaker 06:
It's combined, the pivoting and the coupling motion.

[00:23:34] Speaker 06:
And the court doesn't need to just look at this language in embodiment 13.

[00:23:38] Speaker 06:
I would point the court to also look at the language in embodiment 19, which we haven't talked about quite so much yet.

[00:23:44] Speaker 06:
This is on appendix 229, column 78, around line 40, actually 38.

[00:23:53] Speaker 06:
It says each coupling described above has the following structure.

[00:23:57] Speaker 06:
So this embodiment 19 is describing all of the coupling mechanisms in the embodiments that have come so far.

[00:24:04] Speaker 06:
And then starting on line 40, it lists all of those coupling mechanisms in all of the embodiment.

[00:24:10] Speaker 06:
And then it says in line 48, each coupling is pivotable.

[00:24:15] Speaker 06:
And then as this goes on towards the bottom of the page, it even describes the pivoting more.

[00:24:19] Speaker 06:
And so it's not just embodiment 13.

[00:24:22] Speaker 06:
If you had a question in your mind, like what does embodiment 13 say?

[00:24:25] Speaker 06:
I think you could also look to embodiment 19, which says it is describing the coupling mechanisms in every embodiment, including 13 and describing them as pivotable.

[00:24:35] Speaker 04:
So it may be pivotable, but if it doesn't pivot, then you have just the axial motion.

[00:24:40] Speaker 04:
Is that right?

[00:24:41] Speaker 06:
Well, there's nothing in embodiment 13 or anywhere in the specification that teaches just axial motion.

[00:24:49] Speaker 06:
it says that pivoting motion and axial motion have to be combined.

[00:24:52] Speaker 06:
And I think if you look at both the description in embodiment 13 and in the figure, it shows why you need to have the pivoting specifically to disengage the coupling member.

[00:25:03] Speaker 06:
And so if you looked at figure 87, for example, which is on page 37 of our briefs, also in the appendix on page 165, I think it helps to see how this embodiment 13 works.

[00:25:19] Speaker 06:
which is that you have a spring that's pushing the drum mechanism that has the coupling member on the end of it, which in our brief is in yellow, but coupling member is kind of the thing in the middle.

[00:25:32] Speaker 06:
And then you have it connecting to the drive shaft, which is coming from the other direction.

[00:25:36] Speaker 06:
And so figure 88 showed us how that got in the place, which is the coupling member pivoted.

[00:25:41] Speaker 04:
But in 13, if they're lined up, actually, then you wouldn't want it to pivot.

[00:25:48] Speaker 04:
I mean, it doesn't need to pivot.

[00:25:50] Speaker 04:
Is that right?

[00:25:53] Speaker 06:
This figure is talking about when they're lined up axially, but you need to get them into place and you need to get them out of place.

[00:26:00] Speaker 06:
And what I mean by that is you need to insert the printer cartridge to engage it, and then you need to take it out to disengage it.

[00:26:07] Speaker 06:
And the point I was trying to make is that to take it out to disengage it, as well as putting it in, you need to have the axial movement

[00:26:15] Speaker 06:
And this figure 87 in particular shows that because the spring is pushing forward, there's just no mechanism to move it only actually to disengage it.

[00:26:26] Speaker 06:
So it's not just that the language in Embodiment 13 describes the engagement and the disengagement as requiring pivoting.

[00:26:34] Speaker 06:
It's that if you look at this actual picture that has a spring that's pushing forward, the only way that you would disengage it and get it out of there is with

[00:26:42] Speaker 06:
angular, the pivoting movement, and that's exactly what the language in embodiment 13 says.

[00:26:48] Speaker 04:
As a matter of the technology, that can't be accurate if all of the accused devices don't pivot.

[00:26:58] Speaker 06:
Well, that's actually the next point I wanted to make, Your Honor, which is that it's a fundamentally different design and different mechanical structure if you have a device that doesn't pivot and moves only actually.

[00:27:09] Speaker 06:
And if you look, for example, at how our devices work, this is on page eight of our brief, it shows a picture.

[00:27:16] Speaker 06:
And it requires really a whole different mechanical configuration.

[00:27:20] Speaker 06:
On page eight, we show that our coupling mechanism, which is over there, does not pivot, but it kind of starts in one position, and then it pushes outward, kind of like a turtle popping its head out of a shell in order to engage with the drive shaft.

[00:27:34] Speaker 06:
And the way that it does is that it needs these extra kind of mechanics here, which are the blue lever and the green lever that when the printer door is shut, the green lever pushes in and then it causes the coupling member to push outward.

[00:27:48] Speaker 06:
And so this may be too much detail, but I guess the point I'm trying to make is that really it's a whole different design and whole different mechanics.

[00:27:57] Speaker 06:
to say that there's axial-only movement, and that design just isn't present in the specification.

[00:28:02] Speaker 06:
It's not present in the words.

[00:28:03] Speaker 06:
It's not present in the figures.

[00:28:05] Speaker 06:
It's just not there.

[00:28:07] Speaker 04:
Okay.

[00:28:07] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:28:08] Speaker 04:
Does the panel have any questions for Ms.

[00:28:10] Speaker 04:
Saharsky?

[00:28:12] Speaker 05:
Can I, just before you sit down, Ms.

[00:28:14] Speaker 05:
Saharsky, can you respond to the contention that it was error for the ALJ to rely on the expert report that was

[00:28:26] Speaker 05:
that attached to the ID.

[00:28:29] Speaker 06:
Sure.

[00:28:30] Speaker 06:
So the expert report isn't describing just the it is it was in the obviously the 9 1 8 investigation, which is the prior investigation, which addressed the prior patent.

[00:28:39] Speaker 06:
But as the as your honor knows it, there's a common specification because this is a continuation application.

[00:28:45] Speaker 06:
And the point that was being made by the expert in that case was the essence of the invention.

[00:28:51] Speaker 06:
And specifically, the language was that the solution to the problem that the inventors were trying to solve was a coupling member that pivots.

[00:29:01] Speaker 06:
This language is in the appendix on page 196, 92, if the court wants to look at it.

[00:29:06] Speaker 05:
But I think the- But isn't it true that it's the claims that define the invention?

[00:29:11] Speaker 05:
And if they're looking at a different claim,

[00:29:14] Speaker 05:
Isn't that a leap?

[00:29:18] Speaker 06:
Well, the claims are always read in light of the specification.

[00:29:21] Speaker 06:
And the report, Dr. Lux's statement, was not referring to particular claims.

[00:29:25] Speaker 06:
It was referring to the essence of the invention.

[00:29:28] Speaker 06:
It was in the common specification.

[00:29:30] Speaker 06:
And look, I mean, the ALJ here relied on a lot of different evidence.

[00:29:34] Speaker 06:
It wasn't just Dr. Lux's report.

[00:29:36] Speaker 06:
Like counsel for the ITC said, it was the icing on the cake.

[00:29:39] Speaker 06:
you know, everything's pointing in one direction here.

[00:29:41] Speaker 06:
And so, if you only looked at the words and figures in the specification, I think, you know, based on everything that the ALJ focused on, that itself would present a sufficient package for the court to affirm the finding of this avowal.

[00:29:55] Speaker 06:
All right.

[00:29:55] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:29:57] Speaker 04:
Okay.

[00:29:57] Speaker 04:
Anything else from the panel?

[00:30:00] Speaker 04:
No.

[00:30:02] Speaker 04:
Okay.

[00:30:03] Speaker 04:
Okay.

[00:30:03] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:30:03] Speaker 04:
Then we'll proceed with rebuttal.

[00:30:05] Speaker 04:
We have a full rebuttal time, Mr. Sandinato.

[00:30:08] Speaker 01:
Thank you, your honor.

[00:30:09] Speaker 01:
And I'd like to start with the commission's comment that the only thing that we're hanging our hat on is in volume 13.

[00:30:16] Speaker 01:
That's not correct.

[00:30:18] Speaker 01:
Our starting point is the claim language.

[00:30:21] Speaker 01:
And again, everyone agrees that the claim language is clear and has a plain and ordinary meaning here that encompasses both kinds of movement.

[00:30:30] Speaker 01:
Our next point has to do with this supposed disavowal sentence.

[00:30:37] Speaker 01:
Contrary to my friend Mr. Karski's comments, I think that this was the lynchpin of the commission's finding.

[00:30:44] Speaker 01:
And I think that without this sentence, disavowal wouldn't be found.

[00:30:49] Speaker 01:
And as I said in my opening remarks, it's simply not strong enough to constitute a disavowal here.

[00:30:55] Speaker 01:
The disavowal law

[00:30:56] Speaker 01:
It's very, very strict.

[00:30:57] Speaker 01:
It requires that disavowals be clear and unequivocal.

[00:31:00] Speaker 01:
And we just don't have that here.

[00:31:03] Speaker 01:
Among other things, this statement is the subject of two reasonable interpretations.

[00:31:08] Speaker 01:
And that fact alone, the fact that this is amenable to multiple interpretations, is enough to negate a disavowal finding.

[00:31:17] Speaker 01:
The commission mentioned the Tectronix case.

[00:31:20] Speaker 01:
This is very different than the Tectronix case because in the Tectronix case, there were statements of disparagement, disparagement of what was ultimately found to be disavowed.

[00:31:29] Speaker 01:
We have nothing like that here.

[00:31:31] Speaker 01:
We haven't disparaged axial movement.

[00:31:33] Speaker 01:
And in fact, we've taught axial movement and we've taught axial movement as a replacement for pivoting.

[00:31:40] Speaker 01:
Next, the Lux report in the 918, the earlier investigation,

[00:31:46] Speaker 01:
Judge O'Malley, you have it absolutely correct.

[00:31:48] Speaker 01:
In that case, the expert was analyzing claims that expressly required pivoting.

[00:31:54] Speaker 01:
And so it was absolutely correct for him to note that that was a part of the invention.

[00:31:59] Speaker 01:
These are very different claims.

[00:32:01] Speaker 01:
These are claims that don't expressly required pivoting, and they should be analyzed as such.

[00:32:06] Speaker 01:
So the Lux report and the 918 investigation, excuse me, simply has no bearing on the analysis of these claims.

[00:32:15] Speaker 01:
Inviting at 19, Mr. Karski pointed the court to inviting at 19.

[00:32:21] Speaker 01:
And this is an appendix 229 at around line 39 of column 78.

[00:32:26] Speaker 01:
I mean, I do acknowledge that this says each coupling member described above has the following structure.

[00:32:32] Speaker 01:
But then when you look at the coupling members that are listed here, the specific coupling members that are listed here, noticeably absent is the coupling member, Ken 150.

[00:32:44] Speaker 01:
Coupling member 10150 is the coupling member of embodiment 13.

[00:32:49] Speaker 01:
So I don't think that the ALJ was correct in equating this characterization to a characterization of embodiment 13, because the coupling member of embodiment 13, 10150, is not listed.

[00:33:05] Speaker 01:
Even more fundamentally,

[00:33:07] Speaker 01:
This is a discussion of embodiment.

[00:33:10] Speaker 01:
This is not a discussion of the invention as a whole.

[00:33:14] Speaker 01:
This discussion of embodiment 19 comes about five columns before the present invention statement.

[00:33:21] Speaker 01:
And one of the things that we think the LJ did wrong in her analysis was

[00:33:26] Speaker 01:
to equate this discussion of environment 19 with the invention as a whole.

[00:33:32] Speaker 01:
This present invention sentence and the specification, it truly stands alone.

[00:33:37] Speaker 01:
It's the only use of the term present invention in connection with the concept of coupling.

[00:33:44] Speaker 02:
Can I just ask you one question about the column 78?

[00:33:50] Speaker 02:
listing of for example the couplings a blah blah blah blah blah and so on are there put aside the for example and the so on are there any other embodiment couplings that are missing other than the embodiment

[00:34:08] Speaker 01:
That's a very good question and I did not do the count.

[00:34:16] Speaker 01:
I do know for a fact that all of the coupling members that are listed do pivot, for sure.

[00:34:24] Speaker 01:
That's absolutely correct.

[00:34:25] Speaker 01:
I'm not sure whether any others are missing.

[00:34:31] Speaker 01:
So again, the present invention sentence at the end of the specification.

[00:34:36] Speaker 01:
That stands alone.

[00:34:37] Speaker 01:
This term, the present invention, is used much, much more often in the summary of the invention portion of the specification, for example.

[00:34:46] Speaker 01:
And every time it's used, it's used in the context of a statement that is generic to both

[00:34:53] Speaker 01:
pivoting and non-pivoting coupling members.

[00:34:56] Speaker 01:
It's used to describe objects of the invention that are generic to both types of movement.

[00:35:01] Speaker 01:
So we're talking here about a very, very isolated sentence and a sentence that's simply not strong enough to trigger a finding of disavowal.

[00:35:16] Speaker 01:
Finish your thought.

[00:35:17] Speaker 01:
And that was really, thank you, Judge Newman.

[00:35:19] Speaker 01:
That was really the final thought I wanted to leave the court with.

[00:35:23] Speaker 01:
Would the commission's result have been different here if the single sentence were not there?

[00:35:27] Speaker 01:
And I think if you read the ALJ's opinion and if you read the commission's opinion, I think the answer is a clear yes.

[00:35:32] Speaker 01:
The result would have been different.

[00:35:34] Speaker 01:
It's all about this sentence.

[00:35:36] Speaker 01:
And so then we need to think about the propriety of that result.

[00:35:39] Speaker 01:
It's one sentence that's written as an observation, not a mandate.

[00:35:44] Speaker 01:
It doesn't say the present invention is.

[00:35:46] Speaker 01:
It doesn't say the present invention must.

[00:35:48] Speaker 01:
This statement is just far too weak to be the basis for disavowal.

[00:35:53] Speaker 01:
And that's especially true when it's buttressed by clear claim language, as we have here, and by an embodiment that expressly teaches that linear movement can substitute for pivoting.

[00:36:05] Speaker 01:
Thank you, Your Honor.

[00:36:06] Speaker 04:
Does the panel have any more questions for Mr. Sandinatto?

[00:36:10] Speaker 01:
No.

[00:36:11] Speaker 05:
No.

[00:36:12] Speaker 04:
All right.

[00:36:12] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:36:13] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:36:14] Speaker 04:
Thank you all.

[00:36:15] Speaker 04:
This case is taken under submission.