Whether “the Opinion contradicts the district court’s claim construction, which stands as a matter of law in absence of any de novo review, of the ‘plurality of configurations’ limitation.”
Whether “the Panel failed to undertake and set forth a de novo review of the claim construction.”
Whether “the Panel misapplied the district court’s claim construction by adding the requirement that the configurations be ‘physical,’ which is a limitation that was expressly rejected in the district court’s Markman analysis.”
