1. “Whether an accused structure can be found to infringe a means-plus-function limitation merely based on expert testimony that the structure performs the same function as the structure disclosed in the patent, without regard to whether the structures perform that function in substantially the same way.”
2. “Whether a patent claim may be construed to cover a prior-art design where the specification expressly teaches that the prior-art design lacks an essential element of the claimed invention.”
3. “Whether, when performing [a reverse doctrine of equivalents] analysis, it is permissible to determine the principle of operation of the claimed invention by looking exclusively at the accused product rather than the disclosure in the patent.”
