I am struggling to see how a jury instruction addendum such as the above doesn't provide a limitation that is, in essence, further construing the term "entire"? In other words, doesn't this clarification change the original construction which excluded use of an "external clock"? Otherwise, why add it as a jury instruction? What's the difference that I am not seeing? The best I could deduce is that there is no statement that the RO circuit cannot rely on an external clock, but isnt that essentially what is now being clarified by Grewal by excluding "any external clock used to generate a signal" in the addendum? Thanks for your perspective!