Court rejected defendants' assertion of indefiniteness of disputed terms in claim construction, where the intrinsic record and prosecution history of the patents-in-suit provided objective boundaries that would inform a person of ordinary skill in the art about the scope of the patent claims, so the court adopted plaintiffs' proposed constructions after defendants declined to offer competing instructions or present any evidence regarding what they believed a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand the disputed terms to me

Court substituted the federal government for a defendant member of Congress when the underlying events occurred within the scope of the congressman's duties, which required dismissal of the claims for plaintiff's failure to exhaust his administrative remedies under the Federal Tort Claims Act.