1. Where the district court properly instructed the jury to give a claim limitation its "plain and ordinary meaning as viewed from the perspective of a [POSITA]," does Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 135 S.Ct. 831 (2015), allow the Federal Circuit to construe that limitation de novo, giving no deference to the jury's implicit fact findings regarding a POSITA's understanding?

2. May the Federal Circuit apply a new claim construction issued on appeal to grant JMOL based on a trial record developed without that construction, instead of remanding for proceedings consistent with the new claim construction?

Whether the Federal Circuit can construe a claim limitation de novo, disregarding the jury's implicit fact findings on the plain and ordinary meaning to a person of ordinary skill in the art