“Whether waiver prevents a challenge to claim construction on appeal sua sponte where a party’s waiver is based on the fact that the original claim construction was (i) sponsored by the party during Markman, (ii) accepted by the district court, and applied by the jury in reaching its verdict; and (iii) not challenged on appeal by either party. If not, what conditions must exist to overcome such waiver on claim construction.”
“Whether a ‘plain and ordinary meaning’ claim construction is ever appropriate for jury instructions on infringement by the district court; and if so, is it appropriate for simple, non-technical terms such as the element h and ‘hollow drum’ at issue in this case.”
“Whether a jury verdict of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents can be reversed on vitiation grounds as a legal exception to equivalents that negates any requirement for deferential consideration of the substantial evidence supporting the verdict. If so, what are the circumstances that create a legal exception to equivalents by vitiation.”
