Under Nautilus, it is not enough that “a court can ascribe some meaning to a patent’s claims.” Rather, “[t]he claims, when read in light of the specification and the prosecution history, must provide objective boundaries for those of skill in the art.’” Interval Licensing LLC v. AOL, Inc., 766 F.3d 1364, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
“[T]he non-hermetic seal can provide a limited amount of gas exchange with the ambient air while maintaining control over the egress of moisture, volatile flavors, or both (from the orally consumed tobacco product) out of the container.” Id. 3:31-35.
In some embodiments, the tobacco contained in the package device 100 may include portions of leaves, flowers, roots, stems, or extracts thereof of any member of the genus Nicotiana.
If “non-hermetic seal” is not indefinite, it should be construed in view of the specification, which repeatedly explains that the seal allows at least some of the gases created by the tobacco product to escape the container to relieve pressure.
The term “cartomizer” refers to a combined cartridge (“cart”) and atomizer (“omizer”): “[T]he “cartomizer may use heat, ultrasonic energy, or other means to atomize/vaporize a material, such as a liquid solution (i.e. an ‘e-Liquid’), which may be based on propylene glycol, or glycerin, and may include taste and fragrance ingredients,” and “[t]he result is an aerosol mist.” Id. 1:29-34.