“In analyzing whether a claim of a patent is indefinite, should courts rely on or prioritize (a) the claim language and embodiments in the patent that correspond to the claim language over (b) embodiments in the patent that do not correspond to the claim language?”
“In conducting claim construction, should courts choose a construction of a claim term that is based on corresponding embodiments in the specification over a determination of indefiniteness that is based on non-corresponding embodiments in the specification, particularly in view of construction requiring a burden of proof of a preponderance of evidence and indefinitness requiring clear and convincing evidence?”
