The "non-contollable", "...does not depend on external crystal clock..." (Respondents (R) do not use the exact Ward construction on purpose and I can't remember the exact phrase), "varies that is predictable with exact mathematical equation" (the idea of the term and I can't remember this one exactly either). So, the Rs lost the "non-controllable" and the "external crystal clock". The ring oscillator is controlled by voltage, temp and manufacturing process, and can use an external clock to synchronize with the off chip functions, but the ring oscillator does not depend on the external clock to generate the clocking frequency. Again that is dependent upon temp, voltage and manufacturing process on the chip. The Rs also tried to pin down the "varying together" to a mathematical equation. That was denied in the NDoC and the Staff is in agreement with the NDoC (Ware). Because we got that the "directly varies portionally" does not matter because the ring oscillator and the CPU do directly vary portionally, they just don't very in such a predictable manner where an exact mathematical equation can be derived to predict exactly the proportional variance. The ring oscillator and CPU vary portionally based in temp, voltage and process and other factors. Bottom line is the Staff doesn't need yo change their recommendations. I believe we are arguing our extreme positions to get absolute clarity and to counter any arguments posed by the Rs. I believe we are fine with the Staff's recommendations and of course we would never admit that as we would lose our "bargaining" position for the Markman.