Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

AdvanceMe Inc v. Amerimerchant LLC, No. 6:06-cv-00082 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 21, 2006)

See Opinion Disposition stated in the opinion
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division
Case No.
No. 6:06-cv-00082, Dkt. No. 105
Decided
December 21, 2006
Judge
John D. Love, M.J. — Tyler
Document
Order
Length
44 pages

~~ Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105- Filed 12/21/06 Pagelof44PagelD#:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

TYLER DIVISION

ADVANCEME, INC. § §

Plaintiff §

§ CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:05cv424

VS. § §

RAPIDPAY, LLC, BUSINESS §

CAPITAL CORPORATION, FIRST §

FUNDS LLC, MERCHANT MONEY §

TREE, EINC., REACH FINANCIAL, §

LLC and FAST TRANSACT, INC. §

d/b/a SIMPLE CASH § §

Defendants, §

ADVANCEME, INC, § §

Plaintiff § §

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:06cv082 §

AMERIMERCHANT, LLC, § §

Defendant §

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Figure on page 1 of the opinion

This claim construction opinion construes terms in U.S. Patent No. 6,941,281 (“the °281

patent”). Plaintiff AdvanceMe, Inc. (“AdvanceMe”) asserts that Defendants RapidPay, LLC,

Business Capital Corporation, First Funds LLC, Merchant Money Tree, Inc., Reach Financial, LLC,

Fast Transact, LLC d/b/a Simple Cash, and Amerimerchant, LLC have infringed the ‘281 patent.

The Patent

The ‘281 patent is entitled “Automated Payment” and relates to systems and processes for

automated repayment of a loan by a merchant borrower via fees levied through an entity that

Figure on page 2 of the opinion

2~~ Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105_ Filed 12/21/06 Page2of44PagelD#: -

processes payment transactions for the merchant. The systems and processes of the invention utilize

consumer payment transactions with the merchant to allow the merchant to reduce the outstanding

loan amount.

Applicable Law

“Tt is a ‘bedrock principle’ of patent law that ‘the claims of a patent define the invention to

which the patentee is entitled the right to exclude.” Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312

(Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc) (quoting Innova/Pure Water Inc. v. Safari Water Filtration Sys., Inc., 381

F.3d 1111, 1115 (Fed. Cir. 2004)). In claim construction, courts examine the patent’s intrinsic

_ evidence to define the patented invention’s scope. See id.; CR. Bard, Inc. v. U.S. Surgical Corp.,

388 F.3d 858, 861 (Fed. Cir. 2004); Bell Ail. Network Servs., Inc. v. Covad Communications Group,

Inc., 262 F.3d 1258, 1267 (Fed. Cir. 2001). This intrinsic evidence includes the claims themselves,

the specification, and the prosecution history. See Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1314; C_R. Bard, Inc., 388

F.3d at 861. Courts give claim terms their ordinary and accustomed meaning as understood by one

415 F.3d at 1312-13; Alloc, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 342 F.3d 1361, 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

The claims themselves provide substantial guidance in determining the meaning ofp articular

claim terms. Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1314. First, a term’s context in the asserted claim can be very

instructive. Jd. Other asserted or unasserted claims can also aid in determining the claim’s meaning

because claim terms are typically used consistently throughout the patent. Jd. Differences among

the claim terms can also assist in understanding a term’s meaning. Jd. For example, when a

dependent claim adds a limitation to an independent claim, it is presumed that the independent claim

does not include the limitation. /d. at 1314-15.

Figure on page 3 of the opinion

3~ Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105- Filed 12/21/06 Page 3 of 44 PagelD #: —

Claims “must be read in view of the specification, of which they are a part.” Jd. (quoting

Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 52 F.3d 967, 978 (Fed. Cir. 1995)). “[T]he specification

“is always highly relevant to the claim construction analysis. Usually, itis dispositive; it is the single

best guide to the meaning of a disputed term.’” /d. (quoting Vitronics Corp. v. Conceptronic, Inc.,

90 F.3d 1576, 1582 (Fed. Cir. 1996)); Teleflex, Inc. v. Ficosa N. Am. Corp., 299 F.3d 1313, 1325

(Fed. Cir. 2002). This is true because a patentee may define his own terms, give a claim term a

different meaning than the term would otherwise possess, or disclaim or disavow the claim scope.

Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1316. In these situations, the inventor’s lexicography governs. /d. Also, the

specification may resolve ambiguous claim terms “where the ordinary and accustomed meaning of

the words used in the claims lack sufficient clarity to permit the scope of the claim to be ascertained

from the words alone.” Teleflex, Inc., 299 F.3d at 1325. But, “although the specification may aid

the court in interpreting the meaning of disputed claim language, particular embodiments and

examples appearing in the specification will not generally be read into the claims.” Comark

Communications, Inc. v. Harris Corp., 156 F.3d 1182, 1187 (Fed. Cir. 1998); see also Phillips, 415

F.3d at 1323. The prosecution history is another tool to supply the proper context for claim

construction because a patent applicant may also define a term in prosecuting the patent. Home

Diagnostics, Inc., v. Lifescan, Inc., 381 F.3d 1352, 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (“As in the case of the

specification, a patent applicant may define a term in prosecuting a patent.”).

Although extrinsic evidence can be useful, it is “less significant than the intrinsic record in

ng ‘the legally operative meaning of claim language.” Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1317 (quoting determini

C.R. Bard, Inc., 388 F.3d at 862). Technical dictionaries and treatises may help a court understand

the underlying technology and the manner in which one skilled in the art might use claim terms, but4 Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 4of 44 PagelD#: —

Figure on page 4 of the opinion

technical dictionaries and treatises may provide definitions that are too broad or may not be

indicative of how the term is used in the patent. /d. at 1318. Similarly, expert testimony may aid

a court in understanding the underlying technology and determining the particular meaning ofa term

in the pertinent field, but an expert’s conclusory, unsupported assertions as to a term’s definition is

entirely unhelpful to a court. Id. Generally, extrinsic evidence is “less reliable than the patent and

its prosecution history in determining how to read claim terms.” Jd.

The patent-in-suit also contains means-plus-function limitations that require construction.

Where a claim limitation is expressed in “means plus function” language and does not recite definite

structure in support ofits function, the limitation is subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112,96. Braun Med., Inc.

Labs., 124 F.3d 1419, 1424 (Fed. Cir. 1997). In relevant part, 35 U.S.C. § 112, | 6 v. Abbott

hat “such a claim limitation ‘be construed to cover the corresponding structure . . . mandates t

described in the specification and equivalents thereof.” Jd. (citing 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¥ 6).

Accordingly, when faced with means-plus-function limitations, courts “must turn to the written

description of the patent to find the structure that corresponds to the means recited in the

[limitations].” Jd.

Construing a means-plus-function limitation involves multiple inquiries. “The first step in

ng [a means-plus-function] limitation is a determination of the function of the means-plus-construi

on limitation.” Medtronic, Inc. v. Advanced Cardiovascular Sys., Inc., 248 F.3d 1303, 1311 functi

2001). Once a court has determined the limitation’s function, “the next step is to (Fed. Cir.

ne the corresponding structure disclosed in the specification and equivalents thereof.” Id. determi

A “structure disclosed in the specification is ‘corresponding’ structure only if the specification or

prosecution history clearly links or associates that structure to the function recited in the claim.” Jd.

Figure on page 5 of the opinion

5~ Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105 - Filed 12/21/06 Page 5 of 44 PagelD #:

Moreover, the focus of the “corresponding structure” inquiry is not merely whether a structure is

performing the recited function, but rather whether the corresponding structure is “clearly capable of

linked or associated with the [recited] function.” Jd.

The Terms

The parties have agreed on the construction of several previously disputed terms, and the

will construe the remaining disputed terms: “customer identifier,” “obligation,” “debit card,” Court

“smart card,” “accumulating payments until a predetermined amount is reached,“periodically

g,” “third party,” “means for accepting a customer identifier as payment from the customer forwardin

g means),” “means for electronically forwarding information related to the payment to a (acceptin

rized merchant processor (electronically forwarding means),” “means for receiving the compute

related to the payment from the merchant (receiving means),” and “means for information

forwarding a portion of the payment to the third party (portion forwarding means).”

Customer Identifier

tiff proposes the construction, “any information submitted to a merchant or its designee Plain

ment of goods or services.” Defendant advances a construction of “unique identifying for pay

wever, Plaintiff argues that while an account number may serve as a customer account number.” Ho

y skill in the art would clearly understand from reading the claims and the identifier, one of ordinar

1 patent that an account number is only one kind of identifying information specification of the ‘28

a merchant as payment for goods and services as recited in claims | and 10. that can be submitted to

y attempts by Defendant to limit this term to a single specific embodiment Plaintiff discounts an

disclosed in the ‘281 specification.

nters that the ‘281 specification consistently explains that the invention is Defendant cou

Figure on page 6 of the opinion

6~ Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105_ Filed 12/21/06 Page 6 of 44 PagelD #:

concerned with the use of unique identifying account numbers. Defendant points to Column 1, lines

e ‘281 specification which provides several examples of “unique identifying account 31-32, in th

numbers” as “e.g., credit, debit, charge, payment, smart, etc. card numbers.”

specification notes that the payment information that is forwarded to the Indeed, the ‘281

ocessor “relates to a customer identifier” and “that identifier can be the account number merchant pr

example, a debit card, a smart card, a credit card (e.g., a Visa or MasterCard associated with, for

g., an American Express card), etc.” Col. 1, lines 55-61. The ‘281 patent card), a charge card (e.

s card transactions as the basic starting point of the invention. The summary of the invention identifie

sizes that the invention is based on transactions involving unique identifying account also empha

numbers, particularly card account numbers. See Col. 1, lines 17-25 and lines 29-33.

281 specification consistently refers to the use of account numbers, rather than Because the ‘

when explaining the loan repayment process, see Col. 2, lines 44-48, the just “any information,”

Defendants to be correct that Plaintiff's construction is overly broad and is incompatible Court finds

within which the invention operates. Thus, the Court adopts Defendant's with the environment

ues the term customer identifier as “unique identifying account number.” construction and constr

Obligation

s a construction of the term “obligation” as “an amount owed by a merchant Plaintiff advance

y costs or fees arising out of the use of customer identifiers as payment.” that is independent of an

er hand, originally asserted that “obligation” should be construed according Defendants, on the oth

g but then stated in their responsive briefing that the term should account for to its ordinary meanin

es. Defendants argue that the term should exclude only certain enumerated transactional costs and fe

scount rate, interchange fees and network fees), but not other fees and costs fees and costs (e.g., di

Figure on page 7 of the opinion

7~ Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105- Filed 12/21/06 Page 7 of 44 PagelD #:

normally associated with the typical transaction processing environment. Thus, Defendants propose

a construction of: “amount owed by merchant other than the processing fees, i.e., discount rate,

interchange fee, and network fee.”

‘281 specification describes a number of fees and costs that are usually incurred by a The

merchant, including merchant processor fees, discount rates or surcharges, interchange fees, network

rd service fees, transaction fees, and card issuer fees. Col. 4, line 21 - Col. 5, line 3. fees, ca

r, the term “obligation,” as used in the context of the ‘281 patent consistently refers to an Howeve

merchant that is independent of any particular purchase and outside of any of amount owed by the

d/or costs normally imposed on the merchant for a typical processing transaction. The the fees an

es an example of the kinds of fees that are incurred in a typical transaction ‘281 specification provid

processing environment:

The merchant processor 300 thus pays the merchant 20 some amount less than what the merchant 20 would receive in the [typical transaction processing environment described in relation to FIGS. 1A and 1B]... . For example, carrying on with the example introduced above with reference to FIGS. 1A and 1B, instead of paying

to the merchant 20 on a $100 original card purchase, the merchant processor $98.10 30 might send $88.10 to the merchant 20 and the other $10.00 to the [payment

receiver or third party].

See Col. 5, lines 29-37.

e context of authorization and settlement of a customer payment for goods When read in th

from the illustrations that the “obligation” recited in the claims of the ‘281 or services, it is clear

ny of the fees or costs deducted for using the typical transaction processing patent does not include a

“overhead” amounts that are incurred as a result of merely handling the environment, i.e., the

g a customer identifier, not just the discount rate, interchange fees and customer payment usin

dants claim. To limit the “overhead” amounts exclusion to just those things network fees as Defen

Figure on page 8 of the opinion

8Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105- Filed 12/21/06 Page 8 of 44 PagelD #:

specifically enumerated in the ‘281 patent specification would amount to expanding the scope of the

claim language beyond the restrictions fairly articulated in the ‘281 patent specification.

Plaintiff also directs the Court to the prosecution history of the ‘281 patent, and notes that

during the prosecution, the Applicant articulated that “[t]he existence of the loan in the present

invention is independent of and unrelated to the consummation of any particular purchase [by a

customer].” ‘544 Patent File History, 1/20.99 Am. and Resp., p. 3. Defendants assert that this

portion of the prosecution history can be ignored because it was made “during prosecution of a

different patent and with respect to a different term in a different claim” Defs.’ Resp. Claim

Construction Br., p. 8. However, the prosecution history of a parent patent is part of the prosecution

history of the child patent. See Goldenberg v. Cytogen, 373 F.3d 1158, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004)

(holding that the prosecution history of the parent application is treated “as part of the instrinsic

evidence” of the child application when construing claim terms). The ‘281 Patent is a continuation

of the ‘544 Patent, and as Plaintiff points out, both patents contain identical disclosures. Thus, the

statements made during the prosecution of the ‘544 Patent apply to the construction of “obligation”

in the ‘281 Patent.

ordingly, the Court construes the term “obligation” as “an amount owed by a merchant Acc

that is independent of any costs or fees arising out of the use of customer identifiers as payment.”

Debit card

h parties agree that this term should be construed as “‘a card linked to a deposit account.” Bot

However, Defendants propose a construction that includes the phrase “that can be used to make

purchases.” Without this phrase, Defendants argue that “debit card” could be read illogically to

include such things as ATM cards that are linked to deposit account but can only be used to

Figure on page 9 of the opinion

9~~Casé 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 9 of 44 PagelD #:

withdraw cash from those linked deposit accounts, and not to make purchases at a merchant that are

processed using the system and method of the invention.

that including the phrase “that can be used to make purchases” to the Plaintiffs assert

construction of debit card would make the “as payment” portions of claims | and 10 superfluous.

rrect that Defendants’ construction referencing “used to make purchases” is superfluous Plaintiff is co

because the use of the customer identifier to make payment is already specified. See, e.g., Elekta

Instrument S.A. v. O.U.R. Scientific Intern., Inc.,214 F.3d 1302, 1307 (Fed. Cir. 2000); Brainy Ideas,

Inc. v. Media Group, 169 F. Supp.2d 361, 363 n.2 (E.D. Pa. 2001).

Defendants’ argument that otherwise the card could be an ATM card ignores the context of

usage of the term in the claim. The “debit card” is already limited by the claim to use to make

Moreover, the claim is directed to structure. To add the phrase “that can be used to make purchases.

ses” goes beyond mere structure and makes a statement of intended use, which is not a purcha

structural limitation.

Thus, the Court declines to include the additional phrase proposed by Defendants and

construes the term “debit card” as “a card linked to a deposit account.”

Smart card

es propose similar constructions except that Defendants seek to impose an Again, the parti

al limiting phrase. Plaintiff proposes the construction, “a card that contains an integrated addition

as a microprocessor or a memory,” while Defendants advance the construction, “card circuit such

n integrated circuit, such as a microprocessor or a memory, that can be used to make containing a

purchases.”

his is the same issue as presented by “debit card,” although the term “smart,” unlike the T

Figure on page 10 of the opinion

10~~ Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105 - Filed 12/21/06 Pagei10o0f44PagelD ©

#: <pagelD>

e a structural aspect. Likewise, the Court declines to include the additional term “debit” does connot

efendants and construes the term “smart card” as “a card that contains an phrase proposed by D

integrated circuit such as a microprocessor or a memory.”

Accumulating the payments until a predetermined amount is reached

s that the phrase “accumulating the payments until a predetermined amount Plaintiff assert

onstrued as “holding a payment or payments until a predetermined monetary is reached” should be c

Defendants agree with the ending of Plaintiffs proposed construction “. . . until amount is reached.”

ary amount is reached.” However, Defendants assert that the construction a predetermined monet

umulating the payments . . .” rather than “holding a payment or payments . . should start with “acc

.” as proposed by Plaintiff.

pressly uses “payments” in the plural. This requires that there must The claim term itself ex

ent, and that more than one payment, i.e., at least two payments, have to be be more than one paym

Defendants are correct that more than a single payment must be held, and the accumulated. Thus,

se “accumulating the payments until a predetermined amount is reached” Court construes the phra

umulating the payments until a predetermine monetary amount is reached.” as “acc

Periodically forwarding

nstruction for “periodically forwarding” of “forwarding at intervals Plaintiff advances a co

ned amount.” Plaintiff points to two specific situations described in defined by time or predetermi

the illustrated embodiments in the ‘281 specification:

ther embodiment, the merchant processor may periodically forward at least a In ano

f the payment to the lender or designee. For example, the merchant portion o processor may forward payment amounts every month, or based on an amount such

ach one thousand dollars ($1000) worth of transactions. Col. 2, lines 20-25. as after e

Figure on page 11 of the opinion

11‘Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Documenti105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 11 of 44 PagelD

#: <pagelD>

Also, as another example, the merchant processor 300 can periodically forward payment to the lender 60, such as upon every other payment received from the card issuer 50. Col. 5, lines 45-48.

Plaintiff interprets these two statements to require that “periodically forwarding” occurs

(1) after a period of time has elapsed (e.g., every month), or (2) after an event has occurred either:

an amount has been reached or after a certain number of payments have been received). (e.g., after

g to Plaintiff, the proper construction of the term “periodically forwarding” must therefore Accordin

encompass both of these scenarios.

endants, however, argue that “periodically forwarding” should be construed as Def

ding at an interval other than upon every payment,” according to its ordinary and customary “forwar

efendants argue that Plaintiff's proposed construction violates the principle of claim meaning. D

ion in that dependant Claims 8 and 17 refer to accumulation to a predetermined amount, differentiat

r Plaintiff's construction, Claims 9 and 18 will improperly include the scope of Claims 8 but unde

Further, Defendants argue that Plaintiff's construction is premised on an incomplete excerpt and 17.

from the ‘281 specification.

that Plaintiff improperly seeks to limit the claim language to only those The Court finds

he above-mentioned illustrated embodiments. The claim language is broader situations described in t

= with

ndent claims are specific that forwarding is conducted contemporaneously it a ° © t ) D n

a t S a bk c — o owt en aa Teain d Soma Se fest

endent claims’ use of the “periodically” limitation only distinguishes that each payment. The dep

is not done contemporaneously with each payment. Thus, the Court finds Defendants’ forwarding

rect and construes the term “periodically forwarding” as “forwarding at an construction to be cor

interval other than upon every payment.”

Third party

Figure on page 12 of the opinion

12~~“Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105- Filed 12/21/06 Page 12 of 44 PagelD

#: <pagelD>

Plaintiff sets forth a construction for the term “third party” of “a payment receiver, L.e., a

merchant or merchant processor.” Defendants, on the other hand, argue for party that is neither the

tion, “party other than the merchant.” The main distinction between Defendants’ and the construc

onstruction is that Plaintiff seeks to exclude merchant processors from the Plaintiff’s proposed c

y,” whereas Defendants’ position is that the “third party” can be the merchant definition of “third part

processor itself.

ird party” is expressly recited in the second element of claim 10 as follows: The term “th

ng a portion of the payment to the third party to reduce the obligation.” Col. 8, “means for forwardi

, the portion of the payment that would otherwise go to the merchant from lines 19-20. In claim 10

r is instead sent to a separate party that is the payment receiver, i.e., the “third the merchant processo

y,” as this claim language indicates, is that party which receives the portion party.” The “third part

s forwarded by the merchant processor. The payment receiver is referred to as of the payment that i

10 because the payment receiver is a party other than the merchant or a “third party” in claim

merchant processor.

t specification describes the environment of the invention as the purchase The ‘281 paten

Figs. 1A and 1B. Both the merchant and the merchant processor are shown. transaction diagramed in

ment system of the invention is shown in Fig. 1C, which illustrates an The automated repay

r 60) that receives a payment from the merchant processor. Because the additional party (lende

dentified as a principal, it cannot also be a third party to the same transaction. merchant processor is i

nds support only in construing “third party” to be an entity that is not the The claim language fi

merchant or the merchant processor.

the Court adopts Plaintiffs construction and construes the term “third party” Accordingly,

Figure on page 13 of the opinion

13~Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105- Filed 12/21/06 Page13 of 44 PagelD —

#: <pagelD>

to mean a “payment receiver, i.e., a party that is neither the merchant or the merchant processor.”

at a merchant) for accepting a customer identifier as paymentf rom the customer and means Means (

arding information related to the payment to a computerized merchant for electronically forw

processor

The parties have addressed this single “means-plus-function” claim limitation as two separate

means for accepting” and the other being “means for forwarding.” However, limitations, one being “

as written, clearly sets forth dual functions and requires the corresponding structure to the claim,

ardiac Pacemakers Inc. v. St. Jude Med. Inc., 296 F.3d 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2002). perform both. See C

rties advance a construction that includes a telephone and a World Wide Web Also, both pa

orresponding structures. Initially, itis to be noted that the claim clearly specifies page as alternative c

amerchant.” The ‘281 patent specification only identifies that a modality for that the structure is “at

de a customer identifier as payment to a merchant can be use of a telephone or a customer to provi

eb. These modalities are alternatives to a customer being “at a merchant use of the World Wide W

retail establishment. See Col. 2, lines 7-11 and Col. 3, lines 20-27. Therefore, location,” such as a

d Wide Web page are not linked as structure “at a merchant” that performs a telephone and a Worl

fier accepting function specified in the claim, nor is such structure linked to the customer identi

performing the “forwarding” function.

dentifies corresponding structure as being consumer data input device 316 and The Plaintiff i

22 as the “accepting means” and “forwarding means,” respectively. Defendants input/output device 3

pting means” is a keyboard or magnetic card reader but no structure is contend that the “acce

arding means.” According to Defendants, the absence of structure is because disclosed for the “forw

figured software, and a communications device are required to perform the a computer, properly con

the ‘281 patent specification fails to provide an algorithm according to forwarding function but

Figure on page 14 of the opinion

14~ Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105_ Filed 12/21/06 Page 14 of 44 PagelD

#: <pagelD>

which software performs the forwarding function. See Defs.’ Br. at 23-28.

In support of their position, Defendants rely upon WMS Gaming, Inc. v. Int’l Game Tech.,

184 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 1999) and Harris Corp. v. Ericsson Inc., 417 F.3d 1241, 1253 (Fed. Cir.

2005). According to Defendants, the corresponding structure cannot be just a general purpose

computer alone but must also include the algorithm being executed in realization of the specified

function. Plaintiff sidesteps WMS Gaming and Harris by contending that the function is not

computer-implemented. Rather, according to Plaintiff’s view, the “forwarding” function simply

requires a transmission of the payment-related information, which function is adequately

ed by just the modem. Although the parties purport to have “agreed” as to the function, accomplish

they have staked out positions as to the corresponding structure based on differing views of the

ng” function. Plaintiff contends it is simply a transfer of data between the merchant “forwardi

location and the merchant processor, whereas Defendants consider it to involve a complex,

algorithmic processing operation.

The parties, however, do agree that any corresponding structure must be clearly linked to the

claimed function by the ‘281 patent specification. See Pl.’s Br. at 9; Defs.’ Br. at 30. The parties

also agree that the diagram of Fig. 3B illustrates the structure that is disclosed as being “at a

merchant.” The structure of Fig. 3B is further identified as being in accordance with Verifone

merchant-location equipment. See Col. 6, lines 57-59. Moreover, the ‘281 patent specification

es the linking of Verifone equipment to the accepting and forwarding functions in the reiterat

he Invention. See Col. 2, lines 31-43. Neither of the parties disputed at oral argument Summary of t

e merchant-location equipment includes a keypad, magnetic card reader, processor, that Verifon

memory and modem. All of these components are shown in Fig. 3B. Also, such equipment would15 Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Documenti105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 15 of 44 PagelD

Figure on page 15 of the opinion

#: <pagelD>

killed in the art to include the necessary software algorithms for execution be understood by one s

ducting the necessary point-of-sale operations attendant accepting a customer by a processor in con

identifier and forwarding payment information.

on is with respect to “information related to the payment” from the The “forwarding” functi

atent specification describes the equipment of Fig. 3B as including a cash customer. The ‘281 p

which permits a sales clerk to enter the amount of the customer purchase and register device 318,

information.” See Col. 6, lines 34-39. The description continues with an “nossibly other related

on data entered through the keypad/card reader and the cash register explanation that the transacti

ory along with merchant data including information identifying, for example, may be stored in mem

e. See Col. 6, lines 43-49. Throughout the description of Fig. 3B in the time or location of the sal

mation related to the payment,” the ‘281 patent specification does not mention relation to the “infor

cuses on the processor and memory elements of Fig. 3B. Thus, the /O modem 322 and instead fo

oes not link the modem 322 standing alone to “information related to the ‘281 patent specification d

the payment.”

312 is part of the corresponding structure linked to forwarding Because the processor

nt, in accordance with WMS Gaming and Harris, any disclosed information related to the payme

he corresponding structure. Defendants contend that there is no algorithm is necessarily part of t

‘281 patent specification identifies Verifone merchant-location algorithm disclosed. However, the

y available and is identified in the 281 patent as including all the equipment, which was generall

tware to be executed by the processor, for implementing the accepting and structure, including sof

his is a description of sufficient disclosure to one skilled in the art. See forwarding functions. T

Atmel Corp. v. Information Storage Devices, Inc., 198 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 1999).

Figure on page 16 of the opinion

16~ Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Documenti105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 16 of 44 PagelD

#: <pagelD>

udes therefore that the corresponding structure “at a merchant” linked by the The Court concl

on to the accepting and forwarding functions is a combination of processor ‘281 patent specificati

dem 322, and a keypad or magnetic card reader 316, together with software 312, memory 320, mo

hm as implemented by Verifone merchant-location equipment available as of the executing an algorit

te of the parent application, serial no. 08/890,398. Consequently, the limitation July 9, 1997, filing da

ns for accepting a customer identifier as payment from the customer and for of “at a merchant, mea

lly forwarding information related to the payment to a computerized merchant processor” electronica

combination of processor 312, memory 320, modem 322, and a keypad or magnetic card covers a

software executing an algorithm as implemented by Verifone merchant-reader 316 together with

available as of the July 9, 1997 filing date of the parent application, serial no. location equipment

08/890,398, and equivalents thereof.

Means for receiving the information related to the payment from the merchant

The parties agree that the function of the “receiving means” is “receiving the information

from the merchant.” However, Plaintiffs claim that the corresponding related to the payment

eiving means” is “input/output device 306 or telephone,” while Defendants structure for the “rec

nding structure is a combination of a computer, software, and a physical argue that the correspo

ce. However, Defendants claim that the specification fails to identify any communications devi

software.

only that of “receiving,” which is separate from the functions of authorizing The function is

patent speaks in terms of an authorization request going to a merchant and settling. The ‘281

by transmission through the telephone system or other network prior to processor electronically

on. See Col. 3, lines 31-36. The authorization based on the received information involves authorizati

Figure on page 17 of the opinion

17“Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105- Filed 12/21/06 Page 17 of 44 PagelD

#: <pagelD>

processing of the information and thus stands apart from the receiving of the information.

he structure that is clearly linked to the receiving function is a modem. Plaintiff’s T

rly generalized and ignores that the patentee specifically linked the particular construction is ove

performance of the receiving function. The I/O device disclosed is one for modem I/O device to

tions between computers over a telephone line or a network. Thus, the device 306 is an communica

cation between computers for both input and output. Also, there is no linking interface for communi

hone to communication between the merchant 20 and the merchant processor of the use of a telep

300.

trap their argument by positing that modem driver software is required. Defendants boots

he receiving means is necessarily computer-implemented and software must Defendants assert that t

of the disclosure of corresponding structure. Defendants then advance that be included as part

plicit construction of the receiving function as being part of the functionality argument into an im

referenced as being performed by execution of software on processor 300.

ion is without merit. A software driver merely provides the functionality Defendant’s posit

eneral I/O instructions of a computer’s operating system to messages of a type of converting more g

ce can understand. A modem has a particular chipset that implements the that the peripheral devi

nctions. In order for the modem to transmit data, the modem modulation and demodulation fu

priately controlled. This control functionality is outside the recited receiving chipset must be appro

ed information is received following demodulation of the transmission signal function. The forward

to extract the original data signals containing the information.

rues the corresponding structure for the “receiving means” to be the Thus, the Court const

modem 306.

Figure on page 18 of the opinion

18~~ Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105- Filed 12/21/06 Pagei18of44PagelD ~

#: <pagelD>

warding a portion of the payment to the third party to reduce the obligation Means for for

ate that they agree as to the function of the “portion forwarding Again, the parties indic

hird party.” However, their dispute as to the corresponding structure means” other than the term “t

pecification derives from divergent views as to the scope of that disclosed in the ‘281 patent s

roposed construction that the corresponding structure is simply I/O function. Plaintiff advances a p

nt with their argument as to the “payment forwarding means,” device 306 in Fig. 3A. Consiste

forwarding function is computer-implemented but no algorithm is Defendants maintain that the

erforms the function. According to Defendants, without disclosed according to which software p

fficient structure disclosed and the claim is invalid for indefiniteness. such an algorithm, there is insu

means is specified as being at the computerized merchant First, the portion forwarding

or 300 of Fig. 3A is thus linked to the function. Second, the claim processor. The merchant process

is forwarded to the third party. None of the preceding claim specifies that “‘a portion of the payment”

n of the payment.” Therefore, the portion forwarding means limitations provides “a portio

portion of the payment.” The I/O device 306, which is necessarily involves derivation of “a

derivation of “a portion of the payment.” The modem 306 disclosed as a modem, is not linked to a

ith the merchant 20 or a third party lender. Col. 6, lines 60-63; is linked only to the communication w |

1e broader functionality of the merchant Cal. 5, fi S® a ) o = 7 e ta3a

) a a ?i4 s F b O )e s a o e A te

_ E A A n et b fc — 3 L } c Q sra n a dne i a b t — C G i or a ep r p

mory 304, modem 306, merchant accounts database and bus 310, processor to processor 302, me

ming “all of the functionality described herein.” Col. 5, lines 58-61. which are described as perfor

s forwarding a portion of the payment to a third party lender. Such functionality necessarily include

tion describes the environment of the invention as a purchase The ‘281 patent specifica

of a $100 customer purchase. See Col. 4, line 44 to Col. 5, line 3. transaction and uses an example

Figure on page 19 of the opinion

19~ Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105- Filed 12/21/06 Page19o0f44PagelD ~

#: <pagelD>

vides specifics of payment authorization and settlement. Defendants agree that The description pro

cification reasonably describes the algorithm according to which software the ‘281 patent spe

ng and settling functions recited in the claim. See Defs.’ Br. at 34-operates to perform the authorizi

of a portion of the customer payment to a third party lender, the 35. In relation to the forwarding

es in the context of the $100 customer purchase example the ‘281 patent specification describ

ayment that is sent to the lender. See Col. 5, lines 21-37. In that derivation of a portion of the p

orth in which the $98.10 payment amount that exists after settlement description, an algorithm is set f

s applied has a $10.00 amount subtracted from it that is sent to the of the merchant processor fees i

81 patent specification also reasonably describes the algorithm lender. This description in the ‘2

erates to perform the function of “forwarding a portion of the according to which software op

payment to the third party.”

refore that the corresponding structure linked by the ‘281 patent The Court concludes the

portion of the payment function is a combination of processor 302, specification to the forwarding a

gether with software executing an algorithm as described at column memory 304, and modem 306 to

the limitation of “means for forwarding a portion of the payment to 5, lines 21-37. Consequently,

gation” covers a combination of processor 302, memory 304, and the third party to reduce the obli

and equivalents thereof.

Conclusion

the Court interprets the claim language in this case in the manner For the foregoing reasons,

rence, the Court’s claim interpretations are set forth in a table set forth above. For ease of refe

attached to this opinion.

Figure on page 20 of the opinion

20oooee"“Caseé 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105 _ Filed 12/21/06 Page 20 of 44 PagelD

#: <pagelD>

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 21st day of December, 2006.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Figure on page 21 of the opinion

2106-cv-00082-LED-JDL_ Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 21 of 44 PagelD-

3 Li,

eee D 1SD=) Dh

e ee i2 aw

eH s . WoO aee ee OU Hetw ec ee e? ‘ OM sOsU
e:eC Ee BU su II[O j l atpiaica:e e Os IP oy o e er ee h NO do J

aaeHe UL ya O

9 ,

H pedd UO 1 eAHES inbs HeU O. S B -iayn IqU so

hersyE e o duro IOS r

ai acto y o bo JUB taES } se YSI
dqautA OU ae qyee I

uepa

Easu t ea Ys

eae Jo n

see qu or JO Hae: a inu y} Y

: “S v IO o

oTU Y i OIO ‘ ‘ } ie A] ay Ssu H a du y UOT CE et re e JOVS RT Laa xe y UR S :e ) L] U a ee JO sas LA aShaceste soo IIIO l uArss e B y 1 o.id Y t e Ju ur lom 0 a:aeao:n. No lp jo so

oeenb i ss ua UI u n

e iuyyt e g S4 yu

nc ya:u sA Ay e

a ) e S Q

ae aL US Hcu_ ee J
uneuayeee J o SH a O y y

ai s| e

e H

e a ws 8,he es

8e esne

aeeea es

(C eedey Be A PuN D ai O ( oo da H 'D l

et

e

P.

ea:

PZF-A9-$

0:9 (D

M ue su 78 s- e L -49- p :A Ay 90: sOa n 9 nOc u

E op

Le t e e E

6 oe 1-

‘U 7

'd u

‘ C Ca Ca .a:a a aa ay aY “ sv qd ov DV O is oV N " O SA t J v O L D eie obg aqin N Vd otaUa na u

pSERE ei u

eer

A I ,:tAut S NVO NSAete fae VO ASUN LIe e) A Ad LOdeeeLCe S SV I aneosPee T obse esve be aes

-l eneiny eB H:Edtot1ib|ae

— EUeEc HS

eaek s

A ee e

TI S IN nBa epe AI HO O re juo O TI V - w AI d te Ae SO D 8 a d O caeie IAIB

a eaete: S E e

aeG

e eai

L es

- AV SIA o :he S HO IV aeayeee B

  • - 'ID aa }

“ — ua I T t V LN ee 0 J I VHOU A’ o O o AIAT IN B } } JO

YAY O a C

etre t p Ca Ca aa L us oyr JU ay ay yO A eea uiq RYO s S oO ov V

e a ns IO ou p v V

nise UI si o V v

:a so o

NOLLOMLL LINETAG A Jea p s O SNOO NOLLON

T D S DA-SAT

T NOL d-SNVaA

J

o

AV :

dG Id |

Z =

    • o S SU yn W ‘ N ua Te p
oo [D ] pA ‘ L

eS t L

eai e

eesee a s fa a ee ‘O ‘E e]o V P Ayy poz o oj “ aee 'S L eot uoi u p a ee uog ndu A eLw oay r0s } l aeaaa U e S U e ee ea ‘ ( UIP ‘ C W p Grn Z 9 IB I A O I B eetesra Pe I “ MI ( ( Su N VT Le tree Joenee L ] OJ O O pn T D e“e euln p p pa b

.aBe oyBee oy ] yl ] oe ‘O ti eODsno so oa N a aLo ee yy ‘ ‘ p d) T aaEe ie ) € I u esUaieeseis L e p p

eneetsirer e u u SA eeeia: aaiten * e e W ieleree Z ‘ B LL O s

“ RE “ OJUI (I H LN e L ] RUI I I e s | | | OT N O£ eeee@Se e U A easesEes gosaeti: acete BSee | | | | O e GH | | N SEbree j V eUS e xo Ao Su & a ‘to 9 u y uRY A eeBa uro WOJ lp y sse Y & e e oOJ G ap ysm SsSN sem } o o } OUL O Y e d S io jid NV BLUa y 0 O p AC } u Y Hopee F j e

e A y O o ee e e

mDBE at yU } JU

ETIS n OW SU

ea S Ae ‘ IA ‘ ee E d 1os p ed jue OUa e E soo oy w Yy Tqe ae oid ej o oio

ee U ol nz ul

IE e S o SeeU SE O d pe seaS U zue
poyee U ynd gTGeure e ) uro oett eeOsoynRyee & s c otte

Ee a

esaa W =j O eee s Bu uey TG aeaaniB Nd O o oio U a ESI ceaa.HeS sos luo y Ju w OoTe OL e aLE Ge oe ) ULIO y ‘W e A[ JUL ) e

ne [eo & o e es Ij99 RYy u ceeilvtyU e ]9 0 oIa J ,

A DC2 Enet JU ur jy s ee eaae SU } o se n Oue eLone et T o o 0peeSet a AR y A Y y.Se Ceee

1veeeyB pa q

weDtJnee ye U

co—G jo o

eesecteeueeceitcy r nI o

    • o elat O s ee d p y eees es ‘y j ew } eear G ueY e ee yoI =p l ao p oU ezis pa a8 o I p ayn o A n e ozu dwio so e Sve s oyn 0. y j q AL cneaeee ve dui } o C aesereee ‘SU UOT ocs } Ofeeats ISL eUT U 0 Fee u ICU IOTU & OE po NaaeE IOD AD T SsI pre Ese IPW Su TG mJo ee UO TIN ju o y nEc pI b ou
oe Js rd u ea ed

V T

i & p i u

re

J OU je e YOI a UR 4q J a2y3 a

ai5 s

Figure on page 22 of the opinion

22agelD’ of 44 P age 22 06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 P

ofl.» pagelibD>

PEEpasepees Aa Be K SDs e E s R

etaae oeJee J s eeOH uorjo 0 O sjso O

:e }pe esu } J o Y

nn ne ey oss } a p oo s B y e e e o oid jua uo e evoone yp w “AT J w e seeejsne E olo iAe [BO O Ae E sy H d IUO A d Pepi Eetm TJD9

aictad F ua e J I9 q A

e a a 9W S u

ede c O}s e N

e ea a Nd i p O

G sr d om uenyA a e O JUN S Bted5 faE ae r U OUW o

ia eete oa E T J

)desE } o S . H: Ue y U

nOo S Jo e IS

eeeririsae uh J B JUR Y TI s sEttitee O dIe pe O YoI B } yuo V e aSLe OU U pu iEOnR } J E IAI ju sd

ageHHBeat o po B0 n opu al&asel es Lay 0I o l sia ae eue r sue JU ljyu es auEU eeLeea r o JOI y BYO op iekrEESeaeMA Panr Y pW w U IO t #eyleaB ee} } USp e W aaeeq s I e octeaG:e erO e d S S ayc ee H taa sryr p 9Q enaet t egs ee U o q oR te Su r

ans a I o ee eeneE nae s o y ea rheSere ro n y 9 u enaied s aa t eperae ] nreSistie netteeart , } JO y 5 Uare s eeea M 0

l est

Eeietae ei aa en n K

eeaeenaees r taee . e Hm ee ae

POHaG et

5eU d s en aca ee

oat er oe

cre ae

enan e e

LTBeeeeneo ju

SR Eni eau eyo S einS fe sio eeea aed ut

StesP e Gn es e a iat a2 : ee

s > s

R ,< “ OU

IE oaSm7 t!e IOMI S g4cantedaeta Y o1 an

nee eip

h7 ‘ e aoe : e

esoS A u ee e p eL q

in j t o p o e om A F o ‘ i

y Be ee R 9

8 ment

Z a4 C e vE H an a

Jun

oU Yy
a D

O

V V UL 904

D OV IO}

u ey LYO d oH osu

C

a

b ae e e= ee eH a eUt e

la é eBe _ ae n Heee Hs o A E 3 aH a BU aea g A I

PSess “!= es u SL M usp . e IV

e Oeaeoei ree a p , afB s aess am e“hts Kao oSeee o o d eo J j se k o iems gioi NES e eont ea aO S

e e pee yuo O

eve es ju pua O n el eS no do ] 9s eeueeUSA wr pu

e eBe L aiSe M C e l es t e H

ep tiaiet E a } Lisee,aece E I y te a iesnue R O o ycrees

a Sagi o ps t e $

neaag eSse ea {SO J AESeeee uesOBo I o O eSHsikEn BE S O a neer e A V u eaBi a y

; aEAa Y o aEPCR teenes fait RIL n EE, al e E

e Be es E 2: enEfnstee Hete agpeguealaeAeBe(eerEEEee e reaveearess e aeeat eeS t ee Beaen eH t se e aay hi fetta e S SU eSa hry rd e UI UI c he cweaersaeneeDis ] IB RI

e h Ias Sieelaue {) Q sttog aesgeh er s3 epne aeS S U ye eoaeaiLa eeri e ME neoEST eUniaeces R D) s eeiRE Y

+ HS a (

a 6

Beate:ee e 1

aee e ea U U

eoLeeo

e ceeeneee ee UO T

aEeee S I He p

sEc as ri4 sI] u uSs p: ee p po GO pa um eeo H o} j1 y e

eeeee n ee 1o ( 9a oa

He aee enc 9y O yf y

eeee h Epe ) ) )

C aPe ]

aoeseyues e O

uneore Ee

a oane Ha ener pu r

Bee r se e fGE ed e (I ‘ e p es sesa GUee wA t ee ReeeoeUHAP o T aesn S yu

.Seee:eA sa PIE [ ce ee a :a eae

e o;a en e eee H eeate iewa R

eG

5 a

a

Oe

2 a eee e

ataQ Se ee

h oe=wese egp s asu

eat

ase

eaeeai s

eraB ef

e A heu

heeee arEee

f peees e ee e e a ee ypeeese s

Hrs ue aaele oe eoeHe aS

eae

neaec

ae dlsg

e eeeinrsea

aein eyaer enLa s z LLu B 8erl

S e

e sBRabe e eAeep A s E tSeeG:e UiscekeS nn SES eeest oeeed Ua been eeee

Seyited EELB egt aRE Hirecaee ei ceaticesereri cosveresrsreteras se T eeeesc ESsHESerstt Le

p atHSELG ys oforts era h e n E B aie eoSRCaee

ieC E ee ttl

es, e e CSSEREEe

a EreceE E e E ETG , eaeESAe GE sooBe rSee ae bana ty, y sur cee

D No siste ces ab ERTou nsol o THCneiereaA u r Tilvi e ne e uatteasenitOSet mei

hCe eas et ssoURU ie esnUse huGG iea| u t Ea aRa

Eyet eral nietsiat

o Unt est eae ee a bee E nUUR ors aT c e piNGEEaiaeUsetenese nt) oe EPgaC tee ne

Figure on page 23 of the opinion

23_ Case 6 (06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 23 of 44 PagelD

fon.

“Vaben-

e Sen

eo n s aia y e a e so ne eey: d

H ep e e t s

He

3!oe e

e e e

o e a g ul se a ye

n c e o s sLESee e v ) nn e j B a e E o ae U 0 FG

} oe U e L SHE o.Io p eanTA E uRY ox esSE E ‘y Ur Die US ] as A j

c MER } Ay

a ie y

e te o

Pala S

ee ER q o

iE S I dRA A p SU e T r 50:Lesa eachla FceE es

eaca tsEIT 1e Ss eaS

e u. e TS o d y c a aee N M ie

  • o e ra CE e os

ee t ae p u

oe

nGantes ae

Searieets

iEuane

s e

o4o a

aa

e v e e l ea e

amee yooo a uN a

spr yyu Earash daesa uld y‘I S $ Je

qu

a inu e; s e u a A p)

I ru u ER nb

i CE o cae H i eeno ee otSats ea S e

aEE

s eE

eae B eS0 ase i t E } yo9BS5he oe 0pea6 e ee 2 O 8 oowXed S e y an t } L iel ssige 0 y t ds h o ea HE 8s: J e mSG ]

aae n ul u ox

n a a p a eeT q e iy S aeres a oju

nee : set q eul

aewa ES R uol E es 4e c E l

t et g p p e y s o n v u V qn sis e v O ayu ou

d A p s e

o s

ea

eaea a ee G e On se e a

ee a A q

s s

eeee e ia8! EEE Rees ue A WE

He e aaeee eee3 asS e I e a e At s 8 U par O

© lu Yia . eat er D s u;e PPE Lae ae D D L E] B[ uece e g ee ene ne TE IB] “ U IT eenO u a RetS e e UI UN C S SU Spu e ee p S t S PT

easiele sE ae a era y) Sp l US l fe ss e es scee n o U L pU L ° U WY U ee e seees e U aI U JO 1 aH a y T J p [ ( 9 esrER i s Q Z Baesao cc e nn n I “ ( ea p a s SU s o ps S I ( I ee noe ts eeses E y 11 B € es e Ee es f 99 PI ( l O aoc y[) p

BFLE S E “ p ES eiac E Be e u Soee S 8 H SN OS u e se eE eE E S e p Ea e E e ee s y e e e ) ESeeciae e u ) rBoa e ne } p y) T y) oy s] H ras go qo o Yo Z o s S | p oa Nd o e ea ces e p ea e st[ el sTT C s P sn }o ¢ Go lt O}s a}l pu ? H e ers d ne np eE ps roy o ° I po OUI p SE Rie a uo o wor jI Jou p J I re EU ae s

a etc E peas 2 OF et so

e3 a e e te

le Sppeeee enOuNGasSpreeease }

e u

o

iiu3 pibsceeeys sw emeeaee sao tena sy: p c heng

acs

I SND

JsN WO} tea WIO AIJ sSasEeHeeeE i ees JI e

  • - sesaStothees e M so aSee fah} co Oy da ee da oI un

a ee: i a = uy UL B o f B | }

} Y

Y o e o a asks w v eH g a e s e s a

D

e1 e[ } a U f eaT oo oo eu e e us O dui ae nS e ostuid J sasu e aae s

NU

4a re oquIHU JOqUI

s J is

e y a

a d d

c ou e d oyj s

e p w ps pa :é;: G

I V

A B

‘ “

y u o r oe p so o ! ¢ ao e pl do ol sp nd G o un p U “ su JI u esnSge aae. S j

SppeoseteeReikaente o gaeee e ‘Bohae

wa Tactranboawed

Figure on page 24 of the opinion

24Case 6: ‘06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 24 of 44 PagelD

303,06, AL.

oh Bpaaecenneuureaes

apte

eee ooeeeee peeshes eae h eres

< ce eSsoePSaatsta Seneane

onbeaStESSats

forest Rorewsioeee

Sa poaterotors nee

Se

rngSinaaeen SeeuP voEoR E Coens Reyeckcereesan eay

Pe cereoeeeReeheieseacetteauAggeeaneeeog erneSs eaiehk

ea opt o4ageecoe H yu Peeters gLe ldj

eee EanUtees su

_ee ee$ ae

ea w t5

. eeLannueeH0ofee fe.oeeanae yaeSs on "9JOAO

a a o ee: e y)

ey eHe een u

aec e ee p bi aeea Pe

i e ‘A

e IOU

oeaf IOU

ac I q yun R uno oo

so oe Ss e E

e e

A B

35 u S SU

ul LA JO AjU JUO

e e S p S pr r ES

Jossa d01d oID1 UW

: !

BOe e

ef yMf eaee v OUS, jaq o R H ut on a u n a EaSees ueLna Pe b H inu b

ae ea iu C uy ec y) eo e et aai feo n

e v

a e a aeee

b aa e e

i o

e nS 8

sU

CoeaeE pB senSs a}e r H se e U

e o a e0O e ee Io LaS e eie IT d e o N I de B }i a a F W } ur OS S t u a S uo TAI s eea y OO i e . eo Le yp Petes y) aoe= 1S }

ee; J O 0 c yE O 0 1 d o eSS J 1 0

eee e p oHa

p aebe p ojul

e eae r eus

ae e leeee e r uoly

ve e p Bs Le ss yu os

Aea Bea ie a se de o

e Ea se es au éee yei p oe h. e k s pa S eH aa p y

B s oTU L a o v ns OU

n aea eVe doI OUL OU sIs uD u aq YOI e aee p epreWe P 00I WI Yo.A u dea A oyt UR PeU fpea nce u ossa AIO UB sd J dH p y st R s es t J y

a

i RUMp f oi ao BEE e e

eaeeGha HBereEGsee os ns eiea eHRa Hee

u e T e S nA Hleaeeis U e L i a ea a H ITE

ia atyi t aae I [D ‘

aeoise t ejta p L e aa iree s Q

i soa ere n a ‘ c e t eeSaee s m i e OSes d Ee

e e pSt

fe eePEMe ue ic D L ae beftte e s uu e e E] E ien c ge e UN ‘ aue e e f S ‘ PI S se a as U US

: -aSheets r e S l Olf ae tE ea U L T J ] oaeee ee eete e I ‘ Q n e E UMr S : a Z O p (Uee e:E E UB “ P ( U co Eo s ay (

B t eand Seeesecsee e d

e e E r ay € a e e S p T )

ReaDeae ea e tee nee o Gue S T e u eSEYal e eeia eeeS S u ‘T

eH ers p p eeeee eae ‘T a t ueeBr e a e {) L t ] a assa $ igee s 9y O c sno ¢ eea oe s y w }d uIo} eene eaHf e po ‘ Jo s se ee3ee2 e a y

e BE

Lee oe e

s u e : )
per Y] u eaeros ase o O o e eterepate e

9

a s L BI ts o OU
y I HD YOI Oi G ee u }JSH OJS JUR aece QUO IWI

Fu AJ A l oe M oe ee a es OY as e y yd DNI yd co i u UI Zu eao e7 S } | } yd . PD [ Y Y Bu Un o O S Cieea SR pe e B er « a UG e e

e S S

e anS S

Rne Ua H

t e eB G s D

ie o a e el L

ai a W WI

e he PSins a

e ie aS R la o e E E s oco uio

b B a OE a o ui o dw oo e S e ud su dw

areaaEME g sos J sa sui e eN Retee e J so

rerar n LE od U ae C eA b NU N

e A e 3 abe UI uI e eRB s Oq oq eeEO J J SPT a i t s s s HU SEEIEI O e n og y y y «AI

f ht raa a a a e e e d d d sT a5 aBe eEAB a\ (ahaks Me o ESS pess te u ul e e inee a n A o d jo I e S UT yj v oy p

e e aeEs po pA p a& eB e reSecte

iy es reire E beeeon a er eP u iy

a eo a a rea e e asaac e u ]

i e ree ie y e r l s o

e e

wees EG ae r O or eapovaet ee oe s so Y oo TID

: ee B an p os S Uspl da Ie nd O}S Osoreared aaadtsa io [ere nd UI YH un sB su .9U eReeema. nc er d “ Su Iv AO ‘ s s = ePeeeaes. e e j ‘

ysave ore: eBs sag y Si irerock s

Figure on page 25 of the opinion

25Case 6 06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Pa2g5 ofe 44 PagelD

mfrfe2 nacolR-.

E TTs ypogrcr-ee

a EE e S

G e E

Ur

R G

Se

S Ue “S G A OI )

AS Ja y

e P qu o aG in

u

Gd ben

G

otE eE ie ST

Ea M) UO Ue O IOI SO [9 y

n uNn

ef a oDN ea o e B fee

E

EO

e a an G a Yy

E NDS

na NUU eny U e ulyE enti G e S

Saicpesiors e&i

a.

ad ov
oe oy os ed p yun cd i

usu s sy

y} o

we no
p! yu yue Ay oid uL jop S utto

po

estea @

y p y d

y) Nso n ow Ae a iu NU u ou ow

nb ye[ y rej qu 2 o ae o Su [ A eu a

i

a e e eeai

ee a o H

oL J I

e e ee S ai ye L e oaS e eeZ e e e 3 ne2iye s o_ea exs ! ya ae e d B " o3a:9e a ® I Ae

F e He } ow OS

S S_e e u S yu TAI Oe O OD ed

cHc S A N e

: } ou U ow

ee L Spiess 0 0} yu Q n CoE e nin e uuq 4 O v [ Ju SEE nn p 1 I ee e s oym au ay ns bee pe e rets n ee La a yur O

e A uo J aie e one d e u O f:ee O

en p

t S aeaC y p OY d oid Ul }

yeeia E u W so O [ Ae op uo rar IT fo n IOU sI IP oU uoj yo yo U eus e R A RYO ou J SU yu our le po O

l E JU s s p A i E

Boer Se

eee

e a Sanee SU SUI e iL Be U I UIBT TRT)

e SueS L P ® aB eTEC O

Ke: i anan TER J 9“ ‘ y

Q a e eHen o

a e E

ll Rje D D l pa Eae E] Ie[ ‘ E

o& See UII UI ¢ ol

ee 4 S t S ‘ n or

a Spl Sp u oy U U e e IU T U L ‘ [ p L a g agEe aTJ U H U I y i l

e e i a$ J b s

EGf Se Z O p I p 1 enna e © T “ a Lay g e oeEee e s O ( q1 to S ¢ 9e ( oy ( h5 e ee ( y) )

  • o a ee Le ety “ I a Se e e I r

e . d % ‘ u

p r ur Z 9 e u p

e aca$e 9] u ‘ p d OJ ue e n9 y) p y) | L y sse d g uo MI 6 e uo. a £ d oo O umo Ae we rpo IV

  • o or sno yo }SsN yt c epn st OW eo UIP heSereaees Q s Tye WO} o ULO o urly yu uN Ajy S a A JO p JO p S s j

at:

it ee H d e is; bgUaReel BPeaErSRansy )SLEUSG Seee aL sor e

e U ee ey } GAS a } } y} y ye h i U} U e y e SE e O u o o a ep n e O p e8 fefUaaas

e Ne o

e Aa eC o

2ea StaE Sees ei F t J j re e Ueater pta n d SSMts SOe Ueen u ke

ve ETO UBCda Le o ur ne RU RETO e rne w y uo uL

i ee USD aE as r io y oIo te ECM coee CT ryo uey eUeae staee a yu y ue t U aLP do M aes l A eNSi M YM wio oy lsSea eEST ee e Y 9 DI id ar y) sI y eantHE e anna IO ey LD ast ov d Ul d eI e) et P Uld ons U ey o o tae

a E eeen as aenn otu | p lI [ po o e tERn | A]je o } vat od eeeee 2E OS } t u y Ay rl Bee OT y s o o a tsaeSL a o v } u 01 eie Ta eeHy k 0 Q0 A e S iee PeeT IP! OAT eee L neeeeReSeeeenee MU v “I eHa o s hOd t IY e weeen eS ‘A

: e sete uE e ed e RUR esE wd y S e e ea y uo y

eaeeFUaMDnsern eeU S e l D sj oy e ee eSE H ed HEseein ee e e IR v w s a W W ys

aas e e e e Eeke e y HUG e Siees O e o o e ee a rnpse PSE o os ng we e

aseehaet y e reaee diw I y) no j J js E ao te rae su J yy u T e eM H + J so Is o y U g eUG UOU eeera - ~ ed oo y un SESRO sn eaSEGU wA w e J ee ee aBRA d us tid

s E Bn 0}sn sy as j 55 me ee taBeeSSSE oUL )

HSeeeeePCrs enee ER A tartae s B e sE s a

SU nEreSEeer w j EAeeeECO ISteen a a P) eerS a aa s ee H d y) R e ate c sasoeO 7 I s ir aEEes o d ut od 0 N a yean ye eE a m ou jio e oji eA fe t o yj lo oyj wu e ire Se:a eaH uj po ou p pa inie e E a P nPEeeA po p e D e arnUR ege o} se E TiUe h ms

Ha: e Gea nEE pse aup E HMu eEe uI

Ides e eUU etsT S ] p a e feT ] q

: eS See ea e y y ieen LR eeenea a o s s

ece aSieeea n Se SSe ae eee r d s OJ d Ae e saeasT e ee er r g s nso opoi ) ooe 6 y 1d VMA Ae

age elete TBls Z oo sso ay 90ld nu raj oq uimn do 9.0i pA w e adUHe isr eSU o nd d ss9 nel uTu U epn s ssa uUI uo sata eaeeent a L urd uN ‘ s Io0 Su po poy io S j eee ig “ S S s

v ett

Figure on page 26 of the opinion

2606-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 26 of 44 PagelD

offen enanall

ca aa HE re y D.5D) ) i}

iafR RE

eE Seta aeeo nUE L e e t ee ie O B Ua ge S J O en e } es eeU s e 3 sn } J eeo ecM y o o U e EGA o d o H q js O

e s

r e teS A J }

a RE u UI A aetrSU e o I{O IO

e ee e e UL je} OID ULY 1 e u O de TU J

ta Os H A O PN oy S G N d SUI su

s e iy Te se *‘ oe y e o u e u Y} b 0 e uo yIo rin

e B mo J j oy S so e te Us o J UL

e nSS e pa e O i SN eiSNE s Uj s 0 S IP.I n aaS y) 9 1 UIOD JUR

ahiy t or I eUTQ } e u e ep nu n WOTy u aa s n as Ie yu ui Ys e E e B ST lAj oq O y

eeB e UI D p Su j I o ee p B O}SN t u a aa H S OWI o e J e E e eae LA I i y E O s xa

e ap re os

e we IIO u ndur a es e no o] J OIID ajd o-19j e ob e e ju o TU ‘ dinb

se S “SO pod es BUese s S s

DEnEa : ut y) s O y AS u ed UI y U U oid y e ee y dop p u 0R pu o }s mjo r OIO A ny oo

e w ue 0 n s bi os uI O o y RY so oss as 2 yuop 1 os U on yun S J J W yI A yu s

a

etBE e e EN B a e

an

eoe

m e

B5 }

e y u o |ae a

s ‘s

wes e C e ooo ae rn : un 9 ee yc ET y e E }

Ioa

Dn B b

eeas j-e

g zo U

nS. a e e e n ]

d

ooi ssa url Jo S r y
ap CH jo jyu A rd4 O Su
} Joq ey ui u nu

A

ce yi arya eg ee e 7Saa deer aaeese e O N a9] nbg

e ES }0 iu V

a e eesteneee 19 o

e H

-

e a e scBA e eG e ees emI eRon &q

a ao ha a ug t 2 eea T s ea e

H S u

ae E R A O s etu O V 4 ee SEN LI ed

eo T S o S J B I wA S

4 en UI } o IO u} a e ge mo ] J S S ju TA e OUL

e o Y OO y SI G p e } S URY a e J n SPI 0 y DOI J e £ eS s PIU 0 o O TO 8 eE E ] a IOT 1 OA v s RE 9 S J I ‘J Y) a S9 O a } ed g O y e i ae d e Ay . A e £ e O ojut d

nae 2 ur I euu 8 S a e o o wolj S O e nOS jn U oed pO E eANE u J wA O

i s SIO ju S V

Secrets L y BY r Y p v AR vr U OV

JU opu O o S qns UL so O O W O eyo U B od O }SN e A ur OIO si d O o Y}I qH | pu S n WO s oyT BY ou J a JU “ JO Ca

juo $} j JO p JU s

2 a

2 os e

s

eA S SL SU

  • o E: SU U UI ITe leaoaaB E I R E[D 1 [D et ne ee TE 2 I

eS ] 6 fw Pas eH ( e eaieis E e “

ere

y 9

e e

E[D ‘ e (6 ML r , SU ¢ d u oid

out 1 Pr soi U p ao U

U NUS T U ssa oss é e If ‘ Jo t J l

a SUeS IO U o ] I T EEs t p Q B p T

e ean u t p L po o O 1feni po r “ ( oy O d y1 q9 H ee a yo e ¢ tso e os oy ( eh e oy yf ( s y) T ) e E T y ) Ay BBsBaoe ) ‘ L eHeZ sass ncer e

a e e e:e en o T u ‘ e

aandes e c p e u Seef e e r u e fEeye ‘ p s T os p

E s y) l 79 OJ | uc W } dut U | a ay T T roa MI nd O y O en oIST e cer ‘t sNo o o ruo PIE ue eyoI r ezn RY

¢e aaa T WIo} ay “ jeo UI pez yu p ‘ po yu e e Jo p Aj S j ge ee a eae o

ea e

e a }

a ee J e } ] 0

a e } U} u y e O

B e ieeAC y o u J e eDUsReu eES innm a Q p e eS s P ei orse

m oeOiene

i HUp e d

SeaN a eesad B e

| s reies } yr

see% ee i e O y A

.a Hd ‘ e e e ‘ 5 ei iiey a o s i BbeySh W lat a eu2eSe our yo W d eu ineeS oyiertiaS ol ue ISw ooli o os 2 sie SG a ey y LYO so w d y S u ni e d yu e WU ‘Ios UL u Ae Go e z Gtes a Ae co LIOJ uvo w SIT E ee teS a e ee wi da y YRU s ua HR inS : ancEet IG uo uy y UO j WO a aere 3na eS ee j e S ar ‘ e re e 3 p p B eeu ea H o[9 oi & ) ) d ha ga oijo ep } ne y y a i e tieriesa a } otu oy y } uj e o s tv faa eS e q O Ajje p O U zio u e[ e E Ce d d 1 Sul p s) ae LUpHU eel g A J Ae tte S B eHeSNE OPes eePy u ou 0 o

Ee R Erar e jo yu

eS e t i s j U J e spa et ae IO

p res eeaBe e YO d , n S is essooe s 0f yUR Ar o p teraviestene: oSaee ne sate 1 ow suA n haegtt sperap e e = } yu J el ug ea e asee oyn « u j np eaue eHa werveste a yew co o so E yetb ae pa dui a re ul wl ojn l eaEa Es g pe vo ezu o) ea SeB sacs ee o su p O

e e j d Od

e a teeseee 0 M } e T v aide. cg t es 1 e y OOI y wA o o etree e ela o IO o o U n n u OJUL Ul [q TIA ‘u

H p ULI M Lsi SU & ee OTP I oy w

Be U Y u vo e

a s p! su d

ie ES UE } } e en a A s JW 0 } 0 oy) Aya

e y O Be a oo J e naeE u u eyndur pei y vt Io ozL ee yo p ei qo uR

V sy Y y

nE ry wo v y} pa

e o

pue l es O;

OD IO] d e no al OU H MI ]

L UI 1 nd no eM de 0id oss rjsj e W ef YoJ T Ie y O e LIG e}s ojs pPI au sod eio pu vo oj ue u uIp o

u UIS euL em UI w 1os poj Sul j su p ‘y S S

‘ ‘S 1 J S y ‘

Figure on page 27 of the opinion

27Case 6 06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 2o7f 44 PagelD

nomeTy

Pau CTL

a

e a e c es

uo ?rsse ur petuu ye ad a JOU
a IOJS } p Nd 0 op

U}

cert O ty

states ctSaragEiead EteS US

oe rS weeeetpneenedsUOv eanduerheGeragseee getos } 1] vanesS oce Sader BRes Esaepkrioesras O j

SpspoeaceousraresBSaettea: a tea A

acnraet eto2Seesaape eee beSS Se J

oe

9 0

eW y 1

ik )

e ies

s

a Su

bai- I

Ha sN gan

=e aaeesi

eRe: pt Bd epee US OSI

enoeeraHe e yN U

asshes ce Jo eresoeetes pei
is ‘/ ! A sd e a 3 :2p

se 4

ue ete

:

ee

y

7 : d

  • o F a

C

V

v DV DV

Td qay QH CH

c C

|

ae oy a ee

H

eee per 8. a

A8

.a a e

s E AS ae s ainese uo c teyere ne

H uno

ye jul H Be ata

deb t

ea0 a a 8 a e h3eg

dD2H H

s e a E ie

gee = e

pe t SH LTe E

e e

8 einesS

choar“eecetonea4 A

atts poeoteaseook%astate tspoa SieB eostgeerentsc u

eeWe ereoedrae See Saeuse:eees y

weenie Ppaastetesrnsaera:

atPaaeesee Y E2ea!gevSeaete A R

564 O

aepete? RecreateShethserSe eeecsh aae erat ePeeeb moneneenre. Sot

s I L ee Q p siete e ( ‘ Ceaee:eespesmseeetess

i See.Stsite n w d.ws ) ] t

e B{, UE E eLt e UN S G e e u S t 9 ‘ u eae in F3g p ep L er e E a E | l yU Ul “

Sev U Jal I } ee i } Z 9 ae na tes e Y e e t S S5 B o f I “ { ed oh 22s2 e O i ee ea ta y ( E

gy ePe ( b e a ohe> “ I

ey nae T e Bs e e u ene s h u ‘ p nee Ba aetas e

ee u p

eSatS p ) 9y T l

    • o e d y) 0S d | oy Z y9 S O ] A n Ae e II Ae q snd po ¢ S s n ur yo IT ou o uroy “ ‘

uo pa SU u p Jo

SE o y y E

S

} } }

ceataaySecu ~ U o y Sree cS 3oe Q J o

Soeort ie Beey

s

cee

e s

Haleae not eSeeeee= iHees

out

yM suv OIO

Ul

T U

O uin

oq J

a Be: d

    • o o re

b B aeae ep wo p ein e a e Wr id te a ost ga ek s eay s Eee o e eee e

aFistepa ea J

a08ts ate eite e Grre S H

ehoa a e o e e ee e ei

a e Ha ee Ip eae y e y

r H w e !

pa oea vo WIP ane ePS 8 su JI

le uei e p hs "JI

ys

e u ula

e t e eyea e ee

p H

ne a e L

U

S

oe ov

T os oo Nd T nd jd I0}s “ Ssu Su 19U

mSat Peoe ee

Figure on page 28 of the opinion

28gelD 44 Pa ge 28 of ‘Case 6 06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Pa

ffs <nocaolm:

PeyTTL’-

v S auaa B B 7 e U aec4e

a s

ae No

l OJ at Y B

fae o

2soce e SeeRAE

sea" pheneie: eeaeteen cagSeenetanSNe set Seaeeeney SarSeepoesonr wahese ttae osSe teeed OS

ai caeeuSe t SaRreeseictocs ees JU

eeaytAeyers eee UTEO

SOII

M r IN aR } pt u . E o p! u ua uin

ue in ] Ajn aq a a 4jy qu y ui J aB p ul Ja e S U B J

H

e ee

t H x e o sr f ies pe 90idor

p utossaUL y,

y, Woy1O iu oR VyR iu O" |eis|@WI |nb NOS

oso b OD Vay IO o yu aS un |on yUN p A e = i 2 =

ac « e «

: aL & e a e —-

}

s aL 0 asoot e B e S ag c

e i e e UT :ieo WD e

sn e AIOUL ooo e na ooS SB‘B un

p UN N SY F

y O

Eq e } 2 u OO

o

} I e 0 t

RD n U ID os

P2 oI p p In

e Y

q ept i au] upt o yu

e e H LA ey dy Su f d Sul O

oin UO

P Gee ey Tey

ch os UIU

s S D

e s U

e

j var

p d y mu

g u )qULIUWy in ay i S l u in sSodoIO yo br u 4 JOR u bi u re|eIoor|e se n oq
OD ye n oq |ppoyossaJ so o j UTL a o J J

=

B

O

} J

O O

OII ed B ed IN B }I wiA S

8 I ud D—J S us AJa } aw JaS UO j OI a S yu dIA TeJ SO

MTree Sd SU } e } 0 o j

0 0 y I o 0 1 o O 1 a e J J ) e

eyoe y

ulnos e

e ee oyyu y p yul ea ul e uno
  • o uoj s ne le UI uo os ae uo s Soy o ea o oes p coe es po reoy S i =—Es r S pp LeeaoaSs p UT Y s U op o potebuiysEsSe p Y op W nsoJOT Ut U qn IO ts | oeeesae poe vos Yda W gns OW ts } eo0Ad uIo yru YO us seat eSS“ e o ur OI us O VUyssad JO |A po |UR sa J Se ees eeeea) BS Vs |A ayi |URY o J JO A J ease a ; =tAetnh eeis y p J s F etene Sos eer

= oseae SA

a

L e p ee ee

eL oLca e T L pl U e aet e I ]

uns S p ¢ “ Y o .e J “ ( ‘

e 9 i t P L a oo A e T [D g e e ) D L Te E uate e L] Te[ E e UA S “ e e UII UI S u l S A S S O “ GSp! . pl p M r ‘ e|eae es E e I We t bL I( p OT{ U ZT ] s AylrEE a, U T U ‘ g J p Q ce e e Z] “ eE ] o ‘ (

a u Z ‘ ‘ e E it f s € pi ve eeSy e eye ( p “ T g 5E B pi Tu T eBe s ‘ re re a aee e) petess eSs 9? “I “ pu a L i e 99 T ea oa e e|4 u q D) 0y) T ] e w y) p )po T T s e[ n5 10 S O ¢ n a a 1 o ¢ no y Z O |U |m oys oy * “ cn: ee i |}o ys y pe u ou p

o se e pa owo ‘ “ s J eeeee|e a J

a ee ae h H aes e n o as )O}u)

oj } u

aO y oio

J o

BE

Bia ee e : eSeScEanes e s

  • o s

eR e a eHa e a a l e 4:a UlMvou a aul OYsu c ssuv OI a

; | a l u i u7 O Q] in

s eae y nu O qu ote: ui Jo

Soe oq

y rt oe J aa epeeeeB erSeeseaee itoee aSecSeyre

ieoeoe a

2 a e yp a n e vs Suit L e o d elsa

‘e ie ee Do e Wwop an ee eee Ruio av ud naaaB ee WId p os EMe Hie su s e O s sa o p u e O eae E oa e ns 9 in a J

a ee s J a a e a1 H a e p Us aeSa ueee21 ee e e e ngeay e ects : Wq ya

ag :

e cersycSU w ! B e E sw voeIp a Be e yvo e INPL yssu U le asu UI hs ‘JI

    • o S w ‘ Wo

he eEs Sen

a3ecesw.a

aoeS enay See

Rap Rees e

u

aFrae,8:SSee o Y, sae ehh aoresecoSee O
l oer08 Tor oe Taca0snd
so oo SNd CuydTdWL0j rd Td AOJ “SsSuAs

‘Su Su AIU

Figure on page 29 of the opinion

29Case 6 06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 29 of 44 PagelD

+f: cnoaneln-

| aiid Deed ceed

ae=e:e

ue :na ‘ Jawiojsno

i y

oa3:e

aae e Sateaaeae e Seatsl

fe s

Est

or b o u u

    • o ) s n 3 u e opt ept u uin
nu yu nd q ae e Ar lA os Jo aso a w sut Su oy

LaoBieeea WBeoe8 :

f o

e a e : ie "aJOAO

a2npe p

Bee r) ap) e s ru u oss ae e b nbi uN nS on o y oSpemsirohd e

estsectiseoe,nBsS)

eranes

cee HoE

cesSsie

e oe sor ooo os uno un yun y y
t p! apt ap US TyU yu yW LAj lAj ULA Su Su S
BT OV ) y) e Y uy) uy u DV bu e ESTISE A r bi uin Hay n

O nb n aq oH o a TITE O o o J C e l

e

aeH

e e

e n

.ae

ee

ai ie

o

d ed H ed Ae I wA S a T wA S wi OS } ua AIO i ae e CaLe ua IO uo AI a oyur S y DT cn aee EBUeerset y SODLA j SOOT SO e o j

i aaies y 0} o O

  • o o 0 O J 1 1 he e 1 1 I 3 3 _e a y e C eun
uory S d os O
    • o o O po p SP S S V p ae a p op v y W so O merse ueone:eeree so o s O O u IOU sI Ss= . eat pias: sI usI A YO 9u J sae ou J 9 J a JUR s

ace eeEtteeesaseieea s s

—Sadeperecereceee Soeeos

p aevroaeseeee_ropnhrseeoeeees : seeyeae ace

& p ceSoresoe e

wen orog eetr53e:sa ao oaete e

| SU

e SU LIL

NL TD L L

A i [D L p

p “

L aP e ‘ A B eS ‘ 9 g a ] L eiscie ]) 1 UE ‘ E sge a a IIL S S Epeee e: : eesna U S € T “ aoi srees e t S O pt SPT UIP e s e Sp A IU U fI l ‘ U U T “L lU OW OL U

a Ol U I Ja J L J p L T as t J Z ] T Q f ee ( Q “ te c i p p “ po “ ( e aHp o ( }o E 3 yto I E 9y e a ]) S L

y) b I

e p “ I I e

u “ e ‘ u e r u p

e p

e m 9 y) T Ol y a e oy) T L T Oef D 19 oo S aa n9 o S O n9 UO. SN oyst y S o nac a ¢ oys yl ¢ oys BoT UIOJ OUL pa ‘ e our po “ “ our A][ JO I aa p J J

L ae a

eaele e

aap es

R io aobyaye onu TUSHf rea ] ] } l es s sGaSS G } O] } q} o Y O a eee He ua y Y S

e,a ct o J o a I e I P :ea l G p aSUS y cB ACaniensE F,e y ueoie

a g B e e uee S

f TE iepe a e8m neegeS eP e8epE eeae cag nd maeee ieCane eeain oys ue gSe se pu e ew

s o H ree tt ul J eH S ie M aul M vo M uvo

aaEa5t l y ue OY su SYy s A e ee ID s SI DI ee T uls UI Ul

a a a l } c oBu5aea O L 4 ee neee e U T pL 9 aa: ea a e a e a uIn O YUs O

e a Ei oq OY

a e eO g)eea yae \ J J

neeg ale a eeS e ee e a as duea efeen psi e o d

e LS eagB e y

ie aGWt C y es e] o pi lO oo e ios e eei a e u io ie wm W du Hc ngee es du W id su a E a t sti ost sa ae ee e so s eUHf S Eu o o e ee G l 0 e egos e,e eBae 5 J J so gye nd de as f 10j;s u oaae SEse o AsuL S Bqefae Sg ey ees u5 Aeae e oBI ea aREGaPHOE& aa GEulE STAO w u) ow Ha L e FL ew e PT vo O] ue e e SeA As uv v IUI su o LO s s

a ys SA s s AIP As OTJ sA Ne anyet A aP 4 ‘ ys “H y aa I9 a4 wo o ee aeoTee W u eoe t PEa ueee e i eeekOAie o t epUe R eabee tu eE Eeeng eo H e aa ry L Alj

a ET U e ) "u U] UL “Y e e o O 3

INE es

AL I

hpBieHp G UG r ee oo aeaEs e e T oer oe T so ] h elssyesE Ree l oo so d os ao OUL O da a p UaeSeeet esee v oa do ysn S nd Td OI un s Ue

iiite ie yd un ur0j ‘ Su Su UBY ‘ S

aat ts ‘ Su S Ao J

an te ag

eeii e

e

Figure on page 30 of the opinion

3006-cv-00082-LED-JDL Docume1n05t Filed 12/21/06

aff» “nooo. Ps

ee

e$ee

aae

aeee

ecE

eeeB Hne }

na U

aaG d

eee

meeaL

piN

eE OUI

ee U YSI eo B uo JUB nPIsA yo
aeBLE Are etne
3eo u Y} ea yIe H oy 9 aireHe J ainaeeanai n t

y u s O

i ie W

erd [ I

ee eee

B a aaa

eceee y)

e Muae e se ea y | eB

He e

oneey ZeeaHaae

E a ia eEve nieegers Se: cLaLaaaaie e e vee d d heo 1 f ed poi e UL ecea eoe uA oyo r OIO a llLH uo lULi Ay RY

e ase ee sy pou yU

bBeeGG f

ea eiLnBeree

5 fee eee a u osa eM aye aaaeao o s EBPSg

R M o

aG s Ha; % Soeaecn ee:ys teYyJojo H )

eoE s:aeoa U tByL ; es

1a o p: %be

A

ye

g

oIo

a RY

yu

p

0

|o[eaet

a70

. I

e S u T

S ae ®

e e e }

L y u UL pe a OU ye OIO n YOI ULY e ee w Wun unoure JUL OATOOOI J

e [ J “I } l n e eitA: oY} Ayd OY O

aea3;s HO) e

sJwo B raege eaeas

ea

OT AR t U ed W U d MI W a' O wA UO IO ooi PIE O YJI uo e}o ouj sso UI JU “ JO sy Al J Jo S

EE eGei D n na GG

eac E a y S SU SU i e e UN IB IIB ae e G e P IR] 1 ID ]<) 1

Ca D) 6 i e 6 | eiee S a ( ( e aa a sEGe 4sua UI e8

e E Aee EE 3see e EE e

P rE a d e u [e e ee Ro ra u p n eas c yo p U U a t B e e po U

Be e B Se u t L l I t Wtee NHEy ( t ( g u SSe S s L g p8 p weu Eae e p a1 a B E s a e ay I }1 d y1 ti 2as eo io ed 9 e 0 a | a ee na a e ay s a yr o I ie se e n, C ee ) p Ay LT p A L cn Sarak eOeae u u ‘ a Bso re “ r .e u ea eca g n u e eeae ee L y y Ol a pen V e y O y} e tee cun NII ur g n y6 an y s ee cn NU uno pa ‘ ) p ‘ cn a e T y ) lyey e e ea e st P B ee m

f

eBe o ] ] } }

e ice o ) O y U o eaeR isaa n q s O eeeA e: a o J I eS y

T r r

pi p

Ny o

e yLI y

a Ja j eo

ee eSe UI ys iE DIepSH m OIO } eeR UIat eag BY y aIE Re S,a e T y) JU o UD ee IP e ti e SIG U UL s YM e MH H s BO IO eee i C su UIs y ee e U a ow 1 e L ES } suv 0 e MRETA e l d } Q] y sea e e O o 0 8 l a i o peid ni O « if2 Ea asu e isjo e o ee aC E ; u oid. una u u

e e oo po p

i)e a a oss I.e

ee:n s UIM & e

e e : s e H pN y A attics uye e a a e E S v

L Run Ca e D ea aa n [s L W o ePe re IE ea eeae C w } W i e e as er o ed Leo e isu a rd £ a sl o J y o ou E eBee o jyu eskL ae o e J oy e B nB J s ed msz o ee j rd os ae

aee ee OU er uou ur urp eHge e e YSI n ov «sy U tid S ia ea s UB u ey e BO sas y) e e eao y o p SU

o a ea e y y o ee a e ekPES ira

e eeinna tn } W t

ee a Y Ro s ds o

fa R hs S su ys eet H ys Wdo

U FS wa w J

Sa I (ra e

a ya e e e Uh y n eBeB re a u eEa M eea ene ae s , e

ns sb a NL U] PI ee 2eegt a e O ‘Apaed O §=SUI Bn ak s

e e S Y od d

I IO ed E MJO ose 1 O] id orts o L du wd Ur PIe nun 8 oo0 orp or “ OU LI uo no Tp yey I oss pe u

SUR os sj ju SU poj s A

Figure on page 31 of the opinion

3106-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 31 of 44 PagelD 5 o|l.» 19.3cLe> 1.

ee B vPOoYyCILi-ie ae

a

oa L y UE e, en e } : R e 4 E 9 a S o

e so O a s

e e

e J

iiaa W e 8 OIO e

ee URY u O

ee e p J A rieoas N se o

t e }

e 9 J

). 0 os 1 “u

a6 ot V eiaae esi[q SLI i e o UI SNd

e S ULOJ

H n JO ee ao O

e

e oj J a o eia e S na ut

aa o U dop

a a OIO pua 0 sn

ie UBY yuo 1 o

ae aaB y

A

  • o e

Le a e ee e e

. B s

e

e a e

e ay e o

‘s OU

MI

yIO

our

} yos u yue re
    • o u

q p

e A

of

a o

oid ‘ ao lss Su

mo

cese o

p

t

    • o Y]

Ue

d

.e

y ]UT a0]

ie UL RI WYy }0 OIO

A IO E No y LY

d RYD Gun 9 oSU

: qU j J

pecan CaREEa | ae e coc‘reeererat

o.pueeonathet ReeseEe

a eBppeiu a E s eaeLeenBe e ::3p EDEECVOS t a=GSs e: eels 2EEE , l e

prid BU c

e o T

sneoSesisseeTEE S e Saee ees E u zap ee es ST A IS o

Ssaae EL R ee e ESISN E o LI j e e } J SU

?|E e UL y Ge 3 eEST IO e N E LYO J n SIH a CTTU JU ] 98 ae 9 ia u GE } 9 II

U Y S

a PP TE O 4} ees R

D O 9

aE N

it TI I O

ENTEST

: UR J

e

m O

IU LI

i D U ut

RD U J oap O O Sea TOTS O & uad O N

a ueauiee Y}I op }S n

eASoey Ce seee ST O yu S y livenne s Ep EO J

ei eee NA i alee fiG [ tn irsobeiesUL a SU ue eei? eeeeR I ee ase L a SEE i aGti ZE S

aee a IDY UI

aBea Z } IBI ao ee TE 1 t D)

eyt d

c ye seaeMpeirip 6 e eaeDanG se D (

te e S o

r eSiegE TES aeH LESSBEATREA

aS a L D J

Epeieio ME

ae2e ePssse e U e a Meeea eo a e S u

Bci e p U

eaices l

eer n E U L

oraeo‘p ea SI T

a oneaAels LRU

rsc e ETISETA S pa ereeea eeeeLY }to aufe a sf dy

ue ea aad y)

a a: s ie I

S a e ee oEy Z mOcadeheeeB a

Jheoeieettl ‘ d

aeee eee ra r as- peeksPE uso

e: a e ) T ey (61 Qo

e 4 e S s os [G

os O B JEsI

a : p v woT 2eaf ‘

a & z s a eN iee{ e

erbe3 V:

ev

aB )

e I ain ee e Tad Om E ys u I] s eaSeSeesenEpippesstaensts o o

Oe EE

aB Sure

US no

e im r yu

e eDSee na 1ou

S eaA ene yo

e Eaat M yuv A y e

uat : o u

ee ie o1

sEESeB ueT j

a e as UG £ e u

aEsae e vol

. .e P U y} su

e e Q o GO

aae o CU = VSIT

eu ESy « d OH

eUS ee als e "M

c ee Ha a

e es Ay

e Batee e

aSE c e e }

Oes aynSse ee y t a eS ee Bee OREa o

Sefeeats 8

o eee B eg

e ae a REER et ]D o eere E IR

1 uSa aF Wi g) J

aue eEetide r

oy igeg Ses a

s -e rS o p a8 ei.inea iim E ae e i a eH o J eoee COe a s ae4E os y) e ec s du

ae e U ti o

s e renegeALB vO as a aee a sU s t (;n o 3

e ease E n

e aa a r 0 a nea i STE e et f & e s a eea a L sA Ad ay Ease B dI OIJ

Aba Be W Us Snsta e Har y svy e ie a

PEaeSRrn ree & D E p E erats ties T ESee I

ne e U, S O

Uee a U ygees

] O} IOJ

YE 2 EMI id eM y}

e E 6 IPI ss0 PI e

a eetOa =SU oss SUI J

neGeeneyae § iI usSEeoyteta

aS a

Figure on page 32 of the opinion

32Case 6 '06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 32 of 44 PagelD

B

a B e m

g o n

i re q J

u A p q y)

A oio O oU y jo wI u p d AJo OS |e o de J ¢ MIJ os e uc

7 QIV }W o ua 7 wy UL j ‘ E e UOJ ¢ l OL J dd OYR 1 eu or[ 80 U } d ! us e rye 68/ y ool SP 7 no u OWL bs e ‘uo £'0 a sso IJU NO ‘ o A YOI din s T 86 Jo JOI OIS L JUB mm IL “ OW Y} - uo U ) bate J 0 y B 0 O a 1 wo N a U Ro XI : e U} ul r O bs AT[ ios

    • o o ‘ In ndu S op pe ed eA usj age ee W Ja r r usy oz e g V= ydu 1 o sj p

e a l wus 6 ju e &

e OS uo IO L6 un G QUI poy OJL o s O e d JLUT y } S U 6 m o MI l L

, S UOT d E o s TO EX ,S 0] ae } os e y V yo } OU ; e NS OT N B 0I Z ds e O ND e A es yre u Li u IPI ye 0 YyOI

a JUO}S W NJI Jsod O e pi YjI UN s ory pqe ‘ o e p j SU po yUR

OW 2I os “ p J9 S u o [

ID e a IV e SI AERSES 3e

: ,

8

a :

aa a

l

efESF: S ac reas

oaf

Ree ”Ad

He ac s

a e e

)aa pi

n sd , od

8e e o” d 1s 9

a l Ay e B nen p rs [ LI

e Be 1 eo J9

alnta t: s-)LAE o J ‘) O(

e e eu '( e en V S ele u d I V aa w e Y YO

d se s O Aq _ u ‘a J Ca _ no e
    • o u )

9} p O dsy

H oy J O ou v,

‘ o

W g

IN I oy 1 , Op S ng Td-SNVA U AYS gh eo Aay TP IN ou NNA-SN' S 2QIN “eo “p lL ‘OA LA |wew NOLLO AN |pr Io Op |AJ 9O

=

=

Bo eae=cb asoeoayos

Oa tu a oe

e e a isee e Spies

We esoeosat s eateUteara

a e iceRBHr epeta cetcsa u laareeereeec e ue r ae u

aeneice d

S S eon n e L a O,

h a I s- Aa V P M a O d V ( e b Y O e WO

( a A p I . os HA ne a a e o O CG ; l S e e C ey J J

e

d u ch W n E

ee T

: B O a

o g

L

O

be lies S ng NA P o} 09 I ng

su I O dej du P nou n NJ uO0D IA oy n wo wo A uNs BO u aq S :‘ ‘ Jo s J

® ee } 0

HNd 1 AS Ts eo I] INV I oq W

E p W d T d0i l B USP sso U 2 YN no l Jo

JO ojs U

Jaw } S O Rd a UA

J uot u} y Aepes

ED etates s V e LI e 4}

. 9 aeL e T os y) Ol iE e ) L o9y MIO UL 4 dur UL oo aU x:aE o y yy O mor O WIOJ ayn IO st z PSeee SSSe e ac sNd o oa RO est IPI eW 0 zu BYS a (

ohs uo |rjd WLO\ |W |ay |( SU Ayj SU UON pe JU p aenoe e © s Su JOU p

Baoe a

0

e

3 w }

e } 0 B u 3 e O U 4 u 9 3 p J
or d w ye

e } A

s 0 y ‘

a aeuesf e BAREi e

e e nS d s

as e um w d

B a y ai ors 0M oIe o01 l u a S sm ey YI1 RY sss o d GO

  • o le hetebaBeo: Yu qe jU } ‘JO w Ae T] e S a e ty owr w TeS SNOD e|:m oss pi OJUL uv uo MO OOULee d ULA s y NOTL a y v uy 79 OHV

ue e s szo0 B U

ae e rm0 oa e } n ed Ayes iZj } e ) y aah eaaa rd po y ujn 4 o e e_cee ou o uoy e 9

aia q 0J yu } } uIz u

e 1 ed 0 Y S p o oiieps A ws I

car e G } uo J eoPek e v 0 y e oe se s 1 OW to e e yOI } a ea URY d o

D a J de J s V'Tae e c w e IAT e atMe ne 4) uo np S n Se e uoy j so

eBe pay 9

e e s }

g ai ul wt u ro

a efeS Oe pe o p ndu d 0

e o suv iaj O ee ee y pozi M d LA e o y ) e O

e eaJ aIs O 0IA y wA U sg a JUT v Ul ]qo AII a uo s ge ULIO M esI UT W ‘j & O£ E ea OHE UOl SG eo NI O n l U I su I P ea UIp Y d

Gon es — aW } } re A e A 0 0 } y

y A _ OJ s — los

ndu

B W zay e aea O po PA r go YoI SND UI

_ ly UR WIOJ S y

es “ aAS ry

V uor } pa

e y v s
s } no U es ] } l uro ) Mr0 ed id se ysj e e ot AO Ty 0 y O e ud e SHS 9 AE wA oo0 os uej u UT zef RYo I 1 o

u ‘is UIO\ Ip o oss ojel rp p y uBo poj yu su M

su j 1A Su yu ‘1 p Su s “

Figure on page 33 of the opinion

3306-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06© Page 33 of 44 PagelD”

  • * acreeea ser

B joo

WI sJo

shiesBBeese yW 68/ y)

a O "86 Bdee ioe ure se JO €'080

Sojeo set p Aq

asses

oul ow p p s Ar E oyu ye }ua
Z ewo a yea 7 ydu Inb

1 ‘ n o 7 u

ok setee 3 ¢‘ e

aeieien: et sero: r

a Boa eiares T

a e Gsuaee n Suxe UI peorceeeasecon_esceae ryn S “O

pteaentera s h oe U

BSpoooens :3 l aes oe ou

ieees ep 1 [lIa

a W e a n 66 s p

gHa g L u

tse e

Lim E s 6 e

4 He id Z e

ia=od o|o 1aso O

e oss “ ‘

e

SIp O]O

PaS

s n

a o e n ,

e a ON

s hi o U

hens ee 9

f aaa e

eee e e pese oieee Re

Re B aPiBR ecoeea aH: en ee Os G O ee ioeee ne n e seee

e e

C nie e ae eseo

it aes

a eesSaa e ue e

e he

p SUee

e n a eE e oe N n S a ap oaeSEa ea 1A

sS n ESees ee do

s eeossnates32 e

n le e B dee s a

: ee a ocma e el p ia eeeea a2ai Oe 7 a E o Pe e s e e eUSpUea e i S SSc r e

peS iR e o eo Se O Se e e S.ePO+fytE e C

eU UA U e r C aSUe ee E ie eEe an dut s e ten ae /yn e e htasoiseen jno eta Peie e e jnd l rcent O aes F ya ea earaPae a a H B ei aeSeee

eRee g a T eee ea eS Fed as EeeAenee i e ee LeUeU ereaeaea e e ene! a E e c

S R Hfeu S aieSe e c a ueB e nu a esHs Ee aHe 1eee aoeea

L. ea e c e eereee e s ie agea s ateeeass e

oees efe E e e eeeianes au eee c e eee aevs ee e aea

ee pa fo pae EEdes ee

i aa n

:a y a | e: EeSE e! fa n L SEaoo BAa e e Rn sn aUla IEe )Ooe s e eae Risaeete

aeee B ee a esee e e e eyee nt P e eaieoh a ELSg tJ R

tSI eUNpierce e E ee igate y ese ue T aeecp e t aic e he teeot ie s e O

e uAe

iea ee danESea

EuE eaE nT n e ee ey

ae aAU e a f iee ITot e en G eee eee el E E

s eHaeya ! B Sea e

iee e eea e a aeu e eesa en

eaeae e euuoDeeaEa eS iee esG beelTe O

eeeBce ne e leeNU

p ee aheSs See ai n e

S lie aNer BEsne eeu aEea eace a S ae n

eae G saeeleae Go eseuds s k a e3eeIC enen o e

e e HR E oe aeHeRUeBe SH

A e eeUEA a eO Te So noSN O o

qH eS Eee u ees GH E ie. UEU ae e e G e e

eea eaLSSCA ee aeeSOesaeIE

U ea ce e a e Uf e

NO U

E UHHU are SGC SaSaeaa8

,LE SAMr l en tEan e

aGeoCARi e Se en nEER ESB

SI G

S EeCeara n

P Sea ia E a n se HySeeleE e tiinaa CU a e as au

t eele aee e atte raaE eeeRS tte2oiteatheae

e y

Figure on page 34 of the opinion

34: Q

\ C6o:(): Y:© 06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 34 of 44 PagelD

H }

s } ) a B a 4

a U 9

o J

]ol ye po l
I bo oy NO n W 0d o dI so du1 J y

e ian

s }

B : 0

HL ae ea saane o e eaya de e eaa oid ea op eA u O orp T

s ole

p

a ea UT U ed o

n UIOJ OIN us J

Te BYy uo

o UO yU q

e m e y eu d S

a eo e ]9 goi UO ne 1 Noy p } U} 15 u} O pu .O9 rei SY oYy o00 ezL

s c o Y 91. u o/ TUO utu oIN Tez A1 oT a o O 24 o a 1 SO pa P uo a U m (

2 e

e e M-e

ae a

aie

:e k4

ea e

ueaSh a o

’ei

=v o

es s

ifSese eE

on

pe i es j fe

OV DV

bends y AA

tii aq CH e a

CER C

HA

| '

e:

A ae e

ee

tae

a MOAN e e zr

a S

a A.G

e 4Nj

a aaa -s

e ssa e

e e

e e ee

ss Aea e

te se eBahay ae

L e S e Hii :ensei

oneuee Beek

Hepog eO

a aa

a

ap

O LA V

n so aD e a aayGueeCqYOV aqaOV CHA

neiisHe Ca

cte a

} v1 ea a]e

yd

a e uo

ah q

a eel a S Ci 0 eea 1 e r

S e E e Eeeepo pGeaAeeyaye! ny t

L aarene u S ndu ¢ y gS

aPeae see po NAY o/j 0 sun pn.

ee a wo NJI dyn 9 on eAn

    • - 2A jn -w :

aBe te e e pe

a _ r er a o U

ae e s e a

Baeae ea ae )

eea m

H e ase o

Te

ee eei e } s aooas u

era iaee5ee OOI o t aie ee t AIO }

e e ea UL U y eF HaepEeB d o e osUeeaesRee W e N te Uee

ae eL } } }

r O 0 O

eGEee J J SHUr ise

ee ee eeee nne I

c Sun IOJU a u TPUL

: e oaae UWO

eaaes eEEa c oaeeis PRe (OL E l

sSce:s l d YNe vd O

e ene Y} ya se v IO wA

S e RO ye ou u IZL uo (

ena TSU 9 po yu s SU q

e l e

eeaP

eBTE ere EE

etetnee eA aeeeS e H Gs HEr

es HaiSp E

Dae . eS een

eeBtee

e S

n e RE ean e e d

a eee eE

aple U

Uee e

S o I e eeL Ae u APAee

e SSeE

S‘ eeae reinbE

pe B e en en e eeanea

GE e ey aria ORn G Oa

SE a

W e E

t qD

H de es e ar u pi2)aCaoes Gl o e ne enunneeasaee

e aa

eE:e

aee e E ne Du Se a

I eeee

c0SF Lace

e es e

a1 e ron

1 e aee e 3 a 0 eeFN a e a a SSe

EESR e

O agl

eaH ea

e UE B eeee e

S S ISBe

BbSoeaP Rn E

eeG

e E eS

N O a

e A GTSs

eAU cenr esi s ehic Ls u noS

tg eLe

iQeMsHGeel

ranMdEandyecobeb BeU2etEBBib

Figure on page 35 of the opinion

35‘Case 6 06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 35 of 44 PagelD

a eCae

eaaep B y ee e

ueeae

e e

e ei eaS aU e p ¢ BSE 0 e y u 9 OS aoa e v w y}W eN[ e

e e ula WI ur eia a Be lo |e UU p ee e A os A es IOd JO WY U] G NdU N d w J JO S T OI ss IO] re Oo

a e SI t EM y ¢ jJ a IPI A o e Ae e a SU 7 u

descu H ‘ Ul Z 7gu ne o 1 sue e ep ¢-e e W 7 a aWa pop } “

gea UL eor p ty vsee e IO poy i ar

e e e t oee B v p re

e P 0 pu ee 1 } sap y

f y iio ur ne fee o Un o paq so e e q OE xa ¢ NDS

e d e :M id ¢ dse v AI e Ae u } } soo O yN e “ S[B

n w UO /p 0 oss P Zu s SjU

uo 9 10 1 e ae y e e

a

a

eH

see

a ai

t ae B

fR

or es

iteaa ha lee

DYV

y HAa

C °

|

un

R no S eet auo S 9N.

  • o NIN 09 1 3.1
  • o Aa o -3

coaaeaea a la eb i

e aBa an s us Bee e

P ,o

n E E e e SE i a Ss H i ge 2 ae a o e

eee a EEa

AS cao V V

et NW e :o

e IAH aa e

SO a y AU V

ac R eoe: a H qaD uese: ia C aqA H aq C

SeGo seaP a 8 lae c i e eee

aBs a ee

A2 o h p ePue e s e pe de v e UN iecUVcaU Si o eEersea e OR a M €

eye | S uny 0 e y NAY Ho 9 a enSm ANO wo He ea nea -e4 -Oe s e ngee A ai e Re e o eH B A e eeag i aa tee e w a eu . a ee nag ae a a e ee s gee ue Ese sa e e e Snye e A SEae e an ae gs e B ir Ae tye D } D o e e { 8 y IL Qaieee ee OS e ) o W a s e e e } W u a e e IT o l e cean SU l } U

esu eUeSte U 0

n u o e Te 2 e estes } J a eaneo neae teo IO en eee eaaa a o Ln De ea d eaa aB ise a ne a e:TEL ow l eaaa qu e a ne a ey } d y) ol ea aue y) IO o vd ay c e8 } 09 Ol BA rj uA lo ee aeuea TEe TI u y IPI o uo sy ( Aeee S t BS o o SU u y p u e a SU p a i gS

e eRaeR

l O O

e Dsa a ns er ie

e L E " CA cE e SOARa aS e :st iaa aeRoo e en : E

e eS

‘e Ee HNG e hee e e e n

)a UEts ae

v eeacLES e r

e S ei e

eaa ueE

ee se

e a e aBaa

a e e SSC

e Ga s e so e eLsL B S D)e ees e ea e2c a a a e eB1aa e da e Ie eari P eeea ee cya e e p a e e ee e|= p e: u nf P cHeeee a apo e e Lsaeee e e a a e a c B e Z a e eea e ee

e F Uma

e a eaeg

a L ea e H

e HE ieACE ao HENC egDaa n Oe e ee SOs HE a ee eNU R gg U a ESEU

ae S e e

E se

Eye uze a

e n ieeO BN Bue eCe S E e v aaa SS n nREL a P US

a; eGGS)

a du oH e A an GE ne s

nac naa ey

e ee a

ee et aS B ao

Figure on page 36 of the opinion

36Case 6 06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 36 of 44 PagelD

e B

os e e

0 e g O s 1 s B n e

e S e y D A u A J : p q Jo

A qu

} inu oug y ul S e o ep Aro ¢ JO ]T 1

aS PI MI IOs a

US Z SIV UL o

ee h O 7 7 ¢ wW e Soke eratoeeta J ‘ 1 J e oo aeas SheelaSate a NU O dd ds ee ep Sate UI ¢“ est un aLSeeSteeSaS a OQ e L on S _s ptsehaes a J u IOU bs e T ‘u

anesPa£Ee¢taafecss Saevears M YO din s p ayefese porSetsetrees L JUB ur UI

aezs Y} - ao ie Saspler sae y S s

au d a Iv 7_e p Uul as

    • o po pe d
e i d WS o t re y ae¢ eet }sN J podur OF 1 uo ig e n UIO ous 6 y e
    • o JO qw LIS L6 p w E } o SU 6 y S O } S d Z o S0 ex , d0] ear y) un E ‘ oI y T ooi O e O Nd e A Tye er yo a P o N so pa 9YI uy s or lq o :uo

s PI A Jos “ J S w o

ccLe H 4Oa hdsasetsHE Sa es ee e e A a a aaaae EE ee3 e ai e ee : o ae y RTGS Se egofa a S

i:eEeezea c S Pen s ee a s se H R2e A ) pupeareae e c7A A Ba 6EGS E

k iEi s

s cea ee 25 Saa g

54 neyA m o

i 1 US e o rsud es OLVD

s ees, p A [ LI

e D i eo (J A [

, a.

f,

    • * O

d } V

e OY eO as J Hy ‘ e C
    • o u )
ay p O ay g yd J uo ‘o

araeui eeepe ii

ns c yeee 1 op S ny ae eBa NYS eo l, Tj IN ou

aa e Ge JII p p oa IA won a aeee DAN Io S Ar SO -iea i ea ‘ ‘ na e

a a &e e eH enaES e & aeaa eH aesea ie ke ae e eHy eo uef SS sn w ue a e e EE eaaenEaB RS ya ely ae s E S a aoeeee E e e . t Hiseese e du ]I0 eeRee n P

8e j eB e o A V heeo a A e sea en e vy OTE oYyde|o} Md U 0 e O1 e A

L o p J as H 2 te e 0 o C § e J gu 9}

Go

n o c a p 0o M uny

YS d O ro Ho IIL suo IA ndu pI wo NJ ourn dO oy S -I J

a e

ee

a } _ e } 4 nebetes: y 9 c ea n o ctn e ie uaB Le E: a e v e : e p s [D eHu38e: so s D go Te eea po e[ i WI uaneene yI WI j pl seeEee t v US l nFs e e op I e OI U p eseSiSSFat s pu U J ee eapeisoey Jol eo naeasset e3e3e }

a eSeess y o au eZaroateee o J L eHRSeear J u ae Keyaaoe u in

a Sse2 eit e M qu aBEnSae re qu Jo a Beesra$a3es Jo

a er (¢ Geee Pe r y)

a Ul e ) t oo . d o o so o oy s do e sN qo

ee v o snd o i e n pi ULO} o siL o: u yd e io3 oy ( su Su JO p e acntae s Su p Isw p

a e oai ic aagtep eee e a Ee: eeWeoe } a u ) } ) e } ) y o y pea o 0 y d d ae 1 a J o n B a

beea: Baibaeeee ieeee ee sicsnire eLfDepeesers e v e nat eA Hee B s s es5ta a eA setet

  • o na Tn

ae ea e e a eaaka att

en a e e: M ur eee fe e Our U uve | yan S uva sIs s pe aiePeee W s Ul

s se og eL ha Oaee.c ae m i a Q] caa eaea na M ] O U ee e 0 NU uIN ce Qae ae UI oq . e en e a ie aoe AIq a e e a e

a eei a e s

a , 9

e c e f

B S e e d e ed o aA= eee r e Wi os v ee w os pr du pa e7a uio su ae on ud so

sos o I e s. o J aa a J “

ER J

.e S e A abg eaaEE ae o p en o a d qa a u P e .1 Fi t eeei ER po T en ae JI u5 u eea e f o w w v p! e 2aaoee ee S w & P! vo I eeKe i pe R vo US su U eae su W ks P B ae )s F ks ‘AI ays ESTS Te au ys o

waeeeeU a w apitie aeee: eLE $ ss r De e tee S 4P aeA u SA B

Be TS e eee AP o i U a aA U

e S anALTT O :easeER ,taA nRis i peee y ees e d e L c d E Ee ev se Raee AME e ¥ ZI oo dd Nd ne CT S T ss aI0 NS ds Ndo OJs Y ns T do d OJS “ un u sWL iu0otrHeee e “ un uA MWI S S A naRaeeHAETS ast s S A os) ieaUeeEG e aL e |

Figure on page 37 of the opinion

37Case 6 06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 37 of 44 PagelD

a ; B Jo Sol

e oy

ESS }

  • o SS

UE a o

aah re J ae SUE u sie GG p

e

i sLe wl

aSSST Ba owi p

P etn Ar ¢ e syu

L fo 77 aj sTeAIN

e E 1 “ bs B NAN Na 7
e ESE U u US L: ¢‘

fr SA

eeeaa A T

ee a: ad U

ienMCCS ,a S ec a eR

ee is U aeraeg e

a: H S0 s

i ee ow

in a ep

e t eeR W e ee ueH 1

>: BQ 66 p

Ea L

oeeeT eEane I 1o u

ayH se ee E 6 e

n eE eAe S d T | er N ooi O

at N sss “ ‘

e a

iuase . ge aeree ne4 aess eeait i ahas

a ent

n

kes

JO

LT

s ED e pi

JO

JO

eu us no
    • o J

O

) SO

TA

IOS

uyee ay

gd eo ‘pr

e Sne

aoe —

a

AA

IO

PE d

se

    • o a J

LI M

Go

Gs :

vente YS

.A

SeesegBots ON sorteras : eJ os

al:&e AN ur N,

racte fO nd PI

manur sence Jay S

a aeese Sshk

Sapreat ean e

e|

B27

i

pa p nUe erro eeSe USn

a sia a T e e osee a ens e e

ae ese

e

ae

a es ae

: aC

e

aam a a e S

ea ee rrisaynttareenints

P

ee a

e

a

aao

tette

ee

i a B Rep

a ea u

y: e ne eo aee

scn eaeec .ods eae e a

s n e rarer e a a enrciae e)o ae a:eH euee t

P AOoeee U e n r . Laee es eee eed ee e H e

eoeH a S a a A PES a t b ea rin oo se eist Ha aen etUEOrye :p a

E aeeebes S o ess ea ea tnen Ce e

e H gsS e EIp E AT

ae eeleeiy) a

SUE

ees eH PEE e u aB OER iit eSG SUSAA

eeeSLcepieds E ON

E i Me AB O b BaciaSB E aorie u aEOl Oy S iliese n SL(eNG EO Te TSa G EE t la N Aaoeaset ae S Aia RE aG eR CLEN

a ea

eg oesNaeey ET

Figure on page 38 of the opinion

38aa]f) @ ie) (O 2>° ©© © N = LJ a) ? Q | QO © © — a <2) cl NtasN ol‘aan© <o) an a ® (00) 00 ©AedS atat oO. oO @ fa

o..aVc _O 16 ey<0) ALL &)

i QO

EEeEfe:oHnee

B B

B

0 e e

aie u s

. e o l s re A J e u q

p y}

A Io

} oo O OUL y J OUI S e o p I a p J AIE IJO s| je SP
Wa Z VM WO a JIU i pIy 7 SI Iy O nuJOI a JOl 1‘ E W oe ui
7 [ J o oq nU ew O da J R uI ¢“ s R ulj pT
Oq ou OU a S US I ot U OI nb e Y OI
M UBY rdi s N J I ~J uou U s
    • o J y S e J pi d ie e p ow ol Nb
a ep pe eAI d el D W a rt usT }sN aeosaec }SN J du 1 sj WI0 a Ecasen 2Sa UIO urs] 6 Ja

ocrd Jo D yuo IO 6

l QUIO po OFL L e JBUI E y } O U 6 e N yo} a S UOT Z éo s SO OX ,S 0] ear u U eqND aeei a e US Y} T B oidz A e O Nd e A Rs eyi oRo s1 OYS

U A sedO ed pr OYI UI s on jq “ p m osJOUI pbraess je o S Ios‘ p J B u o : useetye e

E ereee a e

: Re u ao

ae 3

a eoeF eee aaef5eae 3aS waele dgs

i2 h oh o 5u s l

Q e p

pi g

e d so

y e} BO

a sA [ LI

ot OL

C Je (J

Q,

e v “S

agge8 d O

ejo o ‘e e YJ COV u eu s O uy

y us a J Ha aO on r

SE u 0)

as erEROS: a} p

af dey 1

io oy

m aun

  • o a H ‘o

B1 H g

4 O

e2 # a peee

uou y eR n

e s u eoi B no y p

Py O S he ol, TO OS uny af A g prPI AT AI no pwee w N |eo so TO dT |ao eies pr ‘“S ‘A 9

| =‘

ae|noe s

a e

e

a e

ee aSYn6os IOV r

u O nd L y P
AT O d OV G p se W _ e I a CaT _ y o o

a e LJ J eSSONS O 81 oSoaeaes ¢

Bae A

O

G

a ata atSES eeeeny

nlchares Seu ee po ay 5 g sés ee peee o O apay ut0 AA un miSnetUs aoe m E o0o Ayd nd L ons sacko:euncse: ‘ S msu dIuo oy P ‘a

Jou 9s s S

|

ue iae

_ y} | e y} o T eae v d ett

O cq g e

eeF e yos D

, aa e s v e]

a rs ]D di aT e eu IR o U eo e pr W v SPT
v pT HU r OIWO Us ISIF U

J F

Ta } O a e O

J U

J N a nu quI

a qui Ja

Ja

(7 Hseee: oe ey)1 en oe y) t aosNd o evsU Sac es Jad os c |UL|nd|eO}s oy UT d |r }sn rt BO upiSur p eRO |un p ulo0 po ( SU S J e eRs en
Y} f) ao y ) O 0y
    • o u 1o s a
e B s seoeSEEneeE gat: +4 S

ee ;

ce ker d

bi ce a M t

a r OY veu

vou OI su Ls su UT
] nU ao U Q uu
IN oq qU J AO

ee

e

acl

e ws m d e] pa

e i os

oo pi W dui :a dui sti

su so 8 e so o

Sue eu J AIH

d“ Yy Us 1v a a— Av os

J P!

E & aur&

ow IPT s suv U aBee uv NU h a s OT ys

ne ‘ Wa p aas

bRessohne etoerone doe toe s ae aSeeSa BeOeNEtee aoet ees

See asees ne

Ly Sees Y, ee:See Lheen O Rese u

oresoe. s

sSoee s ae aaS aSieeEee oed¥ agiea~ Heats% oS at1he Sse S" A T aoedNd arete aees oo odI S p jdNd04s sce do d I “ uru9WI ce uyj uL U sS1 EeSeeeees.SseohseoeaeSoe
Figure on page 39 of the opinion

39Case 6 06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 39 of 44 PagelD

B

" p g 8 u o 6 e n -JU A J

qBYO € IOU °0 sy)

“ S A 68 or

O ZL WO } /8 Jo

ZNU y y p 0 j O] EOWL WY S e !I O

J A I Q e y UIp OTB

[¢ O a PN U € | JO
L oe Z l J de es W eu ord do ¢‘isp ds e re Sur oU ouJ u v uo ul oyop I ‘
e s U or

0 S S “O

1 UO U

iH JLI

O

aaee mbo

aea d A OW

a e[e sTe sn9 YOI

e du orl syu LO} UL

eS “ p wa 61 yua 9U J

aree a O r uo 6 s J &

i aasl UOS Z e oy L ae eUTQ E s p 7 oBases OTP Jo sy SXS r 6 } e y } 2

a (aReg W d A IO A rea u r pun y n ai B ooi d NN e qey “ o u op s 3

bal ssa pe U s, op p :w

e H

e

yd eD sh TII eoi a [ (J
d }O e U OV s O Hae ‘a I Ca

O)

I

Ay ga

. g uny LA AIO po p OT wo O S -

ene.sSae anieeceaen No

3

sareoa HeEeceiaa

nad Eaae aeae nsga | r:e ea a y

a

eee a 4aes dut HO s ae aD2e jn P n e A

= e i A d o . O e DV e a p s aa

e J a CH

faen ne i vy E JO

e 61 a OL M f S e o

G

y

e e S

cerca e N-

a or JI P os I ny

nee N 0S SD du P pou

any : seeetSa OA hsu OIA yn S wo

AlDPaeo Jow d Jo -

NoeSs ewaneeeee tote

e sie ase eone E C r e a ear aane aye ea eePiece eSESee ez

s a HH ee

H $ & Eee

e oe 3 L NSce Br ea 5H , Ss: igece s e nee e e s aoe pebetatene a Speas r a D eae B s t ee EL eLegfce ] a SR G H Sefeeee L a } LE Ge aparece n s U

t eSI eEOS ene y SP! GHn e o IU l eTE u O pa aee OTJ U ee zs aee e J

e S ne

e a O}

o Be EGE s u e J

fna e er PRET L yt n e o8 E2e JUROU e e RE YSI

e s e B e oeeee a e v y) I

ePeed 38uns S dos IOd e s9 S e ek S do sN yi p se UB urj v0y J pa (

aBS FRE RI NSerragsreeee B Rekeeseeeneeae,#eee

Y} }

O O

I 1

toy-ie

pisosehaee yM vowr

OII su Ul

{ OPT

Q IPW

AIMJ

a

aHH OD o

a Haa R uio

CdbE e n ee W id

eS E iese osu

ae U eo e e e e a RE o s

3 NEE eoreea J ND

SER = s OJs as UT

ee A

a: eeaee

a PISse . 8eS : ee eo

a : e e

cn aH es q) O! BO (eE e B e w PVI MUT ees iesSeE a SED oERGp u vo o OT

estee e RS e u e s su "W A ueE R sk

N L G au ay

eeba ESE S n w

oUtireER e

e:a R s ae t E O om

W Se O en

LE u S S I L U],

Sae i

I SCS c O

a i n

e este

Eh ee

eo sor o¥ ee a ] ao od IUL A a S nd Nd YIA : aeea:a ikgSe ‘ uy Su UL

ast age ea ase S J Ge Riponcetea kreekoengee:rrtSeene aexe eaters: SieawavgraaeteFSeiaeis weaeereomeerict:EEEe:g heToeteerseee?oy oe

Figure on page 40 of the opinion

40Case 6 06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 40 of 44 PagelD

e e e j B a ee B Joo

H eera w A io JO

A aeea OI y) YU

eM B VM y J “86 SP

neR IO o £°0 su L

e ee S 68 yn

  • o a r /80 dsc

OE a uon j oe

eEee pouur

i aiHe 3 se O 9

a J s }

SOD O e

ep s

e : se E 1 yua

e sa Z J a yea a H UO 7 O inb

ceae TJBU * Y s

Oa 25e IQU U JO

sat A e3 IOS IM WO ae.neea sett e sev uy swo SN

eefaa: Jo U} S r yo

e u a[q B ‘O ung

obeee n uy U

uan JO rea ae ulpe OS 4 podA 0}

S. Wao [B

GE y I L

6 Io

e 6 s p

aFiee L u 9

, E X 6 e }

a s Z

ea B O S “

oee “ =

riarezteee—arndaaanignas

O

APL

M

a%

cat 2 DV

Haa

oe C

ys} do uoy “o

S

| N.

O ar uny T pr Ho

a a 1a wo a “ -e a1 B ee eae e a a

aSo e e ca jn aif e d e u

s t

a Le

E

:

vy ep

a OV

x Ha

    • o GH

s e

Jour su 0c m a nsuo oy

A s do

nB [o} eae e R

e e A

  • o P s

; ay

n.

t ELLT ga ny

i aae E n su eiaa ST a oH e ER a -w

S

1 AB

eeER eee e : sns LYSe

e e E e

eAGe ea HA

aieis e e S

aee loE ET T g la ART ES

aa ae co

eae e

S, Bse E e a U e

e eeperceae

eietes e

Ha C e B

nE t a

an

ne e e

1 5

9 w ( ae a. [e E Lee s eeSPEs t Es e } s Y O}

aE:TR s O pmeLe Se er J

c e g Le ePu i

S e a bae tsrtta

gdee ic dy sna a aec

a B es

grea eeeee @e ats a ; a g ee airsa nd e e e ts Iojs

ne irea nin Jsw

ee . Le ge aL r

ai e A YM ou _L s tbna sterD IS suv e H e UID H aia n ta a ii eia y) a e ee ge [ ae eeas ars O s

a e

ea } a i voi L ey u etae gea ee 1 e gey ani aCae t eve

aa ee s ead De ye e g s, B e n a ue o3 n edZ e ] Si e ee e IR oo

1n d s2 L e en W ui 2 B oee e uid &oeaiycectectet e ee os

e etrtyed 1 ea o s

L e u e

a L: e R : ale e sss

e a a J nd _e eaeeeersua e a uy ee s u a e s op Be ‘fee e ef a:ey eaS E

ye Le ieesE S b t GO ! n e

k na e a e ow y

t enr D uv A 5 aeiete As s NNs ne }s cDH t E Wd

eeRyU Ato a E see en sNe G

: C eeE e p aoe IT SEaco r eeraSUESi ent n Hge erine o e. RNs g L

PO e U pa Tes S asaaED e SE tice gSO aL r ]9 N: eLUn L oo 39 t P eeAyiee da .14 p ne s te e O urj W0 o ieeks: nes ‘ Ss TU ees s edy t

Figure on page 41 of the opinion

41:)}::O

sioY”)Oo06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 Page 41 of 44 PagelD

a

e S e eee SE e 5n eS

ee g tee n o

Reg e q

z UEaa r A J e eeSTHu u G e p q y) y e e A ro

e RAGIN } oo ®We oe eseers O aul 4 jJ } NO

n te ow S e 0 ep y yU eeeeAIeCaal J A1 ‘z JO Os 9 y e o

e ee IUa AY WI a

iee.DSi z SIV y O

eliRet 1 E WY

hP B 7 ul OL J dd N n ge e ori 80 U e any ae ¢‘ us e orjv 68/ Q

Soe Sia no u OUL bs e ‘u €°0

a hBi O o M YSI din s G 86 [

ea c UR tu U “

iea YI -J us

E o y S

ha J

aee ESss U

aa eaSLeae O o

tHeekttAe ul al “ nb asUEegega po pe d eAt

eSpneBT Wo o re usy

n Si si o J duit 1 ua sy al e aiiS woy 6 y n or sa ea OS uo IO 6 IU oy e neea:a N QUI poy OJL L yoR p

esy LUI } e U 6 wsoeedoidt e) aaO UOTJ ¢ ay s O ex ,S o] ae } as e GmnwAojop

Oeaee e 0Id z A e OS s e A es yie y LI u pnuoTUs to ee aaT B as O d r YI uN s on pqe “ o B p unesyupou e|4aaaae aeeee oss ‘ pe p J9 S u o [ S

ce eu J

e el eaa

aoea eu

a S aeS eeE eoa aep a

a uea e

aseleuesat

ene ene

eecepa

a o ae

eeae re uea ea ae o B eo l

s p

-e p

y

b A

l ed OV eu s qy us a Ca yo
    • o o
ys} q yds uo ‘o

n e

DS

O ai I oy ol M ung

e HI gh e no

e ae:aT vo op PI |wo uHe aa O |pr “t S ‘

He Htees ‘

sn SaiaB

aaae

L lee

eteBo

R

ut 0 d ]1 n P j

A

A d V

O e WO

p as aAY e I o Ca w J 0

1 o

g Ic ¢ 9[

o nag PO neeo DS pH A P yer o M ng e OTL s AS da d you seeO NJ suo T oy an PI wo

eESSerbgyena3A ourn 9O ou J S ‘

DePUEseeieiSEnsT J e PEApuestiD e:tect t HsER

OARe PCt

SIEEn

Ta

e v Ae[Nes )

aie e y D a.o SA o ss e E o e TL ea cwe U

er.e.oa n rel p ie u yo eLee eeoe.aee } g po T

z eluc [ U s a4aa t e s

: O

aa J

. ea

a

e a ane

a eW

go ae d y) I s ae OSRedpoiE oL e |UIM|wt|najo|w yo

eCr |LTE[Nouruno a( GiS cee SUSuTsjupoju p

waensee

a sCP ae : es iaEE e Bee a e aPe e ) s Y} y J

Na acted a iO seeect S

nei

e Uaas

e sue N]

iTgs:seee VI e R;ueeAE5ieeHa JOU yunow

yM aIS

— Ul nase

OJ ejnu MI paj T PAB
Q SUI o1dR d a soND e e ossnUI J 3 ga y JuTef O 4 Aj aeae B 3 ‘ ae

asO

ee [D d o eaH IE ypoi eey W omojo J LBuee Jur y e ae po ry

    • o pa as ef e

a e J E pl oee BIT de: acn U suU

SIO } aa ae URY y z a r y o a

aa L ya e tnU d } n }RouP O 0 nalO : sUsuy A e iu Ee hO [ oH q atse os u

j ntBe W

e aefoey|aaaaSe Y],Je t AaBe &

PaaussBye

n O el : i ov

oy S P d e T m0edI d] rde P LLdwdS t ou
“RSUstIuo 4s yu ea SUosy s eeass; anueiheeartseRie
Figure on page 42 of the opinion

42~~” Case 6:06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document105- Filed 12/21/06 Page 42 of 44 PagelD | :

#: <pagelD> |

t i

es od e

Selyog EsRe ers MeeERcCtA TeOe R OE h FS waa Ss ee See ae t a eeaaned oeE ats Saot

x ' f 6 .

    • o 0 s Seen 3 nm d ee f yro u
  • o m e lo n em ra Od c a st wt Sees Ee s d ne fos t

ret ro my a fo upm stn a ap y a er

    • o o em tr n eh Cig ear entsaro aegro tee rae c ya lit dra a ,2 t

t p wr p 0 a

e of no a 3 . n it * m h , i ro ed ti 73 n p om w - s u a 12 |tn det g e er aci d d n om ded e ri . i

h ht d n r a d

    • o t e ebi se * s h no rcs n ca a itan ed i e el t ibm r l, d d m r e o c r 4 eh t 5 a e ro sc em eru eta se re no t deta o rut a os 0 te uc s viu rut e / ino ma g lum vi te s itc a lum cu sec 3 g ex a q cu n dn rtc rgo fin uc ec de i nu uc t rtS orp ot e e rtS o a ele rp oc ca er rp F ca

pueree rieS teeatse nMUIR LRELEREEORNY

AUSSI Ro oe Nettrt ira ns .spaeee teter memeseet : eeoe oS e ee te

SecHtaeres etee

2

oat ee x ReNe asgtha:ae gnes ae% aed Seiden : etre a8 eewense

a

DE D

ER EE

GA RG

A . *

" * . .

ie Rooyen etcet o2 Sef e Lema 7tte

des as Brg Wee olc

sid ie Ee ppepirateettens

EoSe eoens e

PertO RR Ssy

ee e

ru n eru e t oit tcu no cu|r cn uF rtS N tS |

ec ® 1j

v e d DE

ER DE

GA ER

GA

« .

    • * *

2 tu 2 pt Seaen /uo Sees t tefe ee cans ee cae Se SS gerd Sie et aeons ee er u 6 EregGnd nine on tnea mene eru no utc p 0 Se ieee es eties tc itcn urt » n 3

urt uF S i Sees See S eet oe sSee2

Serta ts

Cet vawtreketnne a

Bs emienes el e

e h m t h t i a t al
    • o C f
    • o t n

i

r o

t f yt

Z oa ra

ay p

snee n thgie oi

; e O tro d )

: ta EP gn p d st d e 7

idr a etal ne r tic

i 4 : :: a snar awf umu my ih eR 1

4 fi em ro cca ap t (

oe See

Suae yoaees

eb SANS Se

Siok SecrSe Lee

etp sn

e

ee c a re e eyS :eee :Sa oE a )8 ew enES

R eB ricoh eco eh Rca eesR c

2 ES ee e

eev HSSaRnioa e teRePrLs eL | a Reca

ro

e SapSraaR sie es

e afu se

b n:2y 353iBea ze :ueee rs S 3$ = 2 aB

fa 1 = a

ea aec

:e Ae

se ea t soL en e

e ee es a aeAeep h| eae ez n ae:

ei e w em e ato fiees o e

eaHso en a

S Aaip s e

e ee ese a a y ee Rts
: aea e oeseeS er eL

2:SREe af 8

: eE 2 se

A SL oer Ai H eR

EB AAN RE ta stwons ov ailsaet eo

pScO UhS eRearglse Cnin spaireetnryceera yeeee stes ReGai ey ticES

Figure on page 43 of the opinion

43Case 6 06-cv-00082-LED-JDL Document 105 Filed 12/21/06 QO. ©io?) ® a ) >)= atat QO. ©o>) cd)

UU

IN]

OS

B

jJ u

oo e YS so B yy O] j
    • o Ay
re OS d MI

y SIB TEsSa,me eget ae uoTy e

©ogw.=eyeSeessere J ed eUIq

apeStoenaate: e e r uAO

Ay S pa

a quo s

    • o SU sap yus p 34 M e e IP TeA ry NQ He IEM IN } IN YI e IO bS .I1 ueu F YS B y} eEe 1r

p

9 u

y} j o

eaS s 0 si]go 9d0}

} & e } ne 4} avee 0 wo 19 !pBSer irea: w ee

POS

O]D

SIp

3A

NZ

ON

L.Y

S

OU

ON

so rA ap

2e)

jnd yno
a /jn dAN : dur QIN to e AGS ea e £C

nee

O

a s

peEnpsc areSnnkeoSeeauress at

oeee :

a

ieBORNEeRcepenignts ae es

osteoaSgpeenoeoa eran 3 eeassepe ars

eae

a

H

e ea O

L Y

leee } y} o

- o ) n y } 0 o

H eo o 9 }

o ea J a y ease e Ajje o S

e e a orp } UI

e ou j PIV

|(ar y ed 0 MI zoapDea _oe _. od O]

a

a ol o _ u d d ]G i e oja eSI n e |yuA |jus Ty

| uo ose uo

| | yu @ yUR vy YOI

    • o io O UL y ul y

a

ra pa o

y j va ys

y) o

H e

oe o j 7 3 an(OE d y} 0 8y] R

a aae

e

ce c j y ss e e e 10d i), uoo

e ez

ee os

: Q

ai s s v ue d URO t

ow Ae W

: ou

ac a Ju

y t

o io e Surpaemao s isH ) E y R e o } e H a 3 eae Su o BU ey a Lz e 5) UTp; IpI 3

he IeM J eM

ia e IO IO]

eeaSne atheSe eekSsE

a od d qo

ae orr z0 TE esT ents rp H. OU On

yeo O UN u

. A u J ‘

Figure on page 44 of the opinion

44Case 6:06-cv-00082-DLoEcuDme-nJDt 1L05 Filed 12/21/06 Page 44of44PagelD

#: <pagelD>

4 2

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

AdvanceMe Inc v. Amerimerchant LLC, No. 6:06-cv-00082 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 21, 2006).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-6_06-cv-00082-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-6_06-cv-00082-0

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.