Um, and I guess the problem with that, obviously, is that if you're trying to capture inventions that have to do with improving something that's an improvement in the business world, what do you do? What do you do? And I guess, I, I don't know, maybe kind of tell us, tell your thinking about it maybe now or, uh, back then, how did you think about, like, "How do I get a point-- to a point where we can actually get a patent starting out with, like, a business invention?"

Yeah.

So i- initially, I was always focusing on, like, what the law was, what the law said, all these case decisions that came down.

And there was one in particular, uh, it was called, uh, I can't-- it was just-- it was called Core Wireless.

And I think the turning point for me was when I attended this oral hearing, and I argued in front of these judges about why our case was similar to Core Wireless.

And their response was that Core Wireless was about, um, you know, an improvement for small displays.

Even though the claims said nothing about small displays, um, and the court decision itself, you know, was based on, you know, other aspects, I realized that, like, it's really important to have story integrated into our applications, right? Story about the technical improvement, why it provides that, that benefit.

Yeah.