Where are the techi's who can respond to the Mei invalidity / prior art contentions?

Could Mei be trying to say that because of this prior patent, and this one too, oh and this one, as well as this one, you take a piece from each and there you have it a 336"?

It's not just one patent your looking for in my opinion its several that when pieces are taken from each they lead you to prior art and or obviousness. The next step in the chain of patents of course would be the 336. I'm not saying this exists in these patents, but I am saying this may be their plan of attack for the jury. If I could even get close to walking a jury around a road map, step by step, from patent piece to patent piece, and finaly wind up arriving at a 336. This is something the jury could grasp. Oh, I see, that's how the 336 was created. This is just a thought and may be out in left field or not even in the ball park. Any techi's out there who could review and respond? All analysis welcome. And finally, yeah what SGE1 says at the end. Not to steal his words or well known coined phrase. GLTAL